This looks like a great resource, but I’m going to go ahead and do it the hard way. Maybe for a first install, just to get the ball rolling, but I typically go the long way around so I can understand what I just did some more. Like when I bought my 3d printer unassembled, so I could learn about it as I put it together. I’ll bookmark the site though. If I’m currently biting off more than I can chew, I’ll probably end up using it. Thanks!
Distrochooser is not a good resource for newbies IMO. There are too many questions, many of which are misleading or hard to understand (NOBODY taking this knows what systemd is)
Many answers are misleasing: “I want a distro that is supported by game publishers” for example implies each distro has its own game compatibility, this is NOT the case.
And when you’re finally done it recommends too many distros, many of which are irrelevant, niche, or flat out not recommended anymore (PCLinuxOS?!?!)
When someone asks for a distro, please just run a random number generator to choose between ZorinOS, PopOS, or Linux Mint. If someone is only gaming, maybe include Nobara too.
Exactly! Many of the criteria included aren’t all that good for new users, and neither are the suggestions. It’s not really a good resource for experienced users either.
Yeah, I disagree. It’s the least subjective resource I can find as nobody asks the questions on that questionnaire here. I’d much prefer it if people used distrochooser and then shared their answers (e.g distrochooser.de/en/d5b60b6e6134/), wrote some extra stuff e.g “I want NVIDIA support because I want CUDA” or something, and based on that, we recommend distros. Instead of the herd mentality of “duh, linux mint stoopeed”
One of us could probably put that together pretty quickly lol
But if we did want to build a new distro recommender… Maybe there are like 5 or so questions that would be relevant.
Just off the top of my head some possibilities:
If you’re a beginner, Mint is a good choice. One could argue Ubuntu (noobs don’t gaf about snap if they even know what it is). I think noobs would want good GUI tools and a very popular, very polished distro. So issues are infrequent but finding answers is easy.
Into gaming? There’s a few distros that come up like Nobara. (I’ve seen Manjaro mentioned but idk).
If you want something that looks kinda like macos there’s Endeavor. Does anyone recommend that one these days? I don’t usually see it mentioned.
Idk.
You’re probably right, an rng that chooses between a few distros might be better lol
Like most others have stated here, I’ll also add my recommendations for Linux Mint.
I have helped most of my family, relatives and several friends move and familiarize themselves with Linux Mint, especially those that do almost everything within the web browser (shopping/email/Facebook/youtube/travel reservation/etc…). Since I already was their goto tech support, I showed them around on Linux Mint and they pretty easily got going as everything was intuitively similar to Windows. All was point and click (after my initial setup with their network, peripherals, printer and some basic automatic updates configuration), no terminal voodoo magic for them.
For the younger ones I typically set them up with Pop!OS and Steam and they are ready to jump without me having to explain much. Sometimes, I had to install and help setup a server (Minecraft) so they can play with their friends.
Mind you, I would not recommend VMware as I am currently evaluating my transition options toward XCP-ng with Xen Orchestra or LXD/Incus or something else entirely.
i think they are already mentioning it: MS has a help webpage on how to install linux, both WSL2 on Windows machine, or how to burn iso and install linux on bare metal. learn.microsoft.com/en-us/linux/install
Microsoft have quite a bit of software that runs on Linux (PowerShell, VS Code, .NET, Azure tools, Intune / Endpoint Manager, even SQL Server) so it’s understandable that they’d have documentation to explain it to their customers.
Yep, they run it themselves even. Previously their motto was “Linux is a Cancer” now they have embraced it and developed their own distro (CBL). With how everything is going WebApp these days, I can see a day when Windows will be linux based kernel.
They already have a Windows version for a handheld. The Xbox runs a modified version of Windows 11. All they’d need to do to bring it in line with PC handhelds is allow the install of third party launchers (they probably wouldn’t do this though).
Laugh at or complain about Ubuntu all you wish… but this type of effort really puts Linux as a compelling competitor to Windows for enterprise desktop users. Rather than paying for the Windows software license and then Microsoft or 3rd party support for the OS on top, the fees would be for dedicated operating system and package support against criticial vulnerabilities. Wouldn’t a business rather have something that “just works as it is” over the long term, rather than something that leaves sysadmins holding their breath every Patch Tuesday with Microsoft randomly shoehorning in “features” here and there that have to be shutoff in GP editor?
More people using Ubuntu means more will be comfortable switching away from mac/Windows. Plus the free software components benefit from having a dedicated team securely supporting the packages over the long term.
The longstanding issue that remains is all the industry-specialized software either crappily-coded or riddled with DRMs and whatnot don’t support Linux well yet.
This is valid for end users too. Ubuntu Pro is free for up to 5 machines. People can install 22.04 and stay on it for 10 years or 24.04 for 12 years. That’s the kind of boring stable desktop operation that only Windows XP has managed to muster and people loved it. It’s perfect for the kind of folks who hate having to do major OS upgrades, as well as people who support others for free. Cough … family IT … cough. You bet your ass the family members I support would stay on 22.04 for a looong time!
How many actual PC handhelds are there?
The link in the article that promises “plenty” of handheld examples talks about Steam deck, Asus, and… the switch. And that’s it. And obviously the switch is not a PC handheld, so… ?
There’s quite a few. Steam deck and Asus, as you mentioned, but there’s also AyaNeo, GPD, OneXPlayer, Aokzoe, Lenovo, etc. And many of these brands have several different models, if you’re counting individual products.
Anecdotally, I have an Aya Neo. I know a few people with a few of the others brands. There’s a decently sized Aya Neo Discord that I’m part of, and I would assume the other brands have something similar. There’s definitely use of non-Steam handhelds, or there wouldn’t be a growing market for them.
I personally love it, and yes it can with a dock similar to the Switch’s. It’s ran every game I’ve thrown at it, and I’ve an original 2021 version. There’s a few quirks, like the joysticks will sometimes just decide to not do a random direction, but recalibrating is easy. Obviously the resolution quality isn’t as stellar as if you were running a pc meant output to a monitor, but on the built in screen everything is crispy. It’s decently heavy though, so my baby wrists get tired after a while. But yeah it’s great, playing whatever wherever is pretty ace.
Not sure what you mean – they all run Linux. The images just have the video hardware configs baked in with a preconfigured user and start script. You would be amazed at how easy that is to do, all things considered. I have a few kiosk configurations I created for the two Home Assistant panels I have in my house.
And, most importantly, money bags to subsidise the hell out of it. Let’s not kid ourselves here, the damn low price is one of the main reasons why people buy the SD rather than the ~2x more expensive alternatives.
The idea of free software is extremely socialist/communist. People working together to create something that anyone can use for free, with profit being a non-existent or at least minor motivator.
It’s a real shame that generally lefties don’t really care about or ‘get’ software freedom. You should be pushing for free software on all levels. In your personal life and in government. It’s crazy how much power a company like Apple, Microsoft or Google has over everyone.
It’s pretty hard to fight hegemony when your salary is just built on donations. A lot of important tech is also paid for via government grants then the private sector gets to use it and erect the walled gardens when it should be in the commons.
It’s mutual. I don’t necessarily extend my expectations of a machine doing what I tell it to, out into geopolitics.
There’s a lot of overlap in useful terminology and philosophy. There’s a bit of overlap in organizational problem-solving (and problem-having). But you can be aggressively capitalist, and still recognize the benefits of stone-soup development. Even in hardware - RISC-V is going to undercut low-end ARM in embedded applications, and hard-drive manufacturers are not exactly Spanish republicans.
The hippies were always capitalist adjacent. Many of them became the Jesus freaks and yuppies.
There were actual leftist movements happening at the time, but those were more of minorities beginning the discussions on how to actively demand power. Black power, gay liberation, women’s liberation, and American communism. Some of this did coincide with the tech hippies.
As a linux leftie, I fully agree. It’s hard to convince people though. Also, I don’t necessarily think it’s the best intro to leftism for layfolk. It’s a great into to leftism for tech nerds and a great intro to tech for left nerds, but the punk who just uses the library computer doesn’t care. Unions are often the easiest intro to leftism for people and not many union folks are interested in learning free software.
I was out drinking the other day and an IBCW friend introduced me to a union brother of his and they’re smart guys who believe in the power of labor, hell they even excitedly showed me that there’s a professionals union in the AFL-CIO, but if I tried to explain a terminal to them they’d look at me like I grew several heads at once.
Free software is great praxis, but it often suffers by the fact that it isn’t what people are used to. That there are intro free softwares like GIMP, libreoffice, and basically anything where FOSS is the default. We can do this, but I think it’s definitely going to not be the easiest sell.
I was leftie before I was techie. If you don’t know anything around tech and computers you wouldn’t know what to do. Even as a fairly tech-adjacent professional it took me quite a while.
Then again, I only became a real leftie again after kicking all the corpos out of my computer.
Tech used to be (and still is) obscured by heavy gatekeeping. We who understand a little more like to joke about those who don’t, and I guess we’ll have to stop that if we really want to unite the left. Don’t ridicule, explain. The person might never have had a chance to learn the concept.
Yeah, if a stereotypical construction union rep feels judged by the FOSS world why would they try.
My local bike coop apparently used to run mint on their computer, but when the person who set it up left town it was too much for the bike nerds who weren’t mad engineers (this person also built an electrolysis tub, that had to be gotten rid of when they left Idk if they were actually an engineer by profession, but my dumb engineer ass keeps hearing they did shit I want to do). They’d go back if it was the same, but windows just works for them and linux needed someone to make it work.
I explained to finance why we had to purchase licenses for for a UI library. To justify the costs, they asked what the alternative was. I told them we don’t have the talent or resources to develop our own UI library… But I offered up free open source alternatives.
Unfortunately the FOSS stuff never gets approved by IT due to vulnerability / threats.
Depends, sometimes not always. Having source available makes it easy for hackers to find exploit but also makes it easier for community to identify and address exploits.
So… For a large active community project, it’s likely fairly secure but for smaller projects with 1 or just a few developers it might be vulnerable.
There’s definitely a gatekeeping issue, but free software doesn’t automatically mean ‘force people to use Linux’, there’s stuff like Firefox, Libreoffice, Nextcloud, etc.
It’s things like councils working together on common software platforms instead of going with commercial vendors, supported by local companies instead of shoveling billions to Google and Microsoft that gets sent overseas immediately. It’s federal governments hiring developers directly to work on software instead of using commercial vendors.
Well, there is also a more right leaning take. You take care of your self and scratch your own itch, and you should not be a liability to the society, but make your self useful and contribute back. And I think this is kind of the reason FLOSS works well, it can be aligned with many philosophies.
That phrase that you said has absolutely nothing to do with the Linux/Libre philosophy.
You take care of your self and scratch your own itch
While I understand that you meant to make an analogy with people creating the projects they want to use, the vast majority of people don’t create their projects, and instead contribute to others, and they contribute with existing issues not necessarily things that they want or need. Alternatively you can see that a lot of issues are fixed by people who are not affected by it, it’s very common for issues to ask people to test specific changes to see if they solved the issue they were facing.
and you should not be a liability to the society
The vast majority of people just use the software that the community maintains, and when they need a feature they open a PR and let the community implement it. So the vast majority of people are a liability to the community, even if you contribute to one project actively you use several others that you’ve never contributed to.
but make your self useful and contribute back.
This has nothing to do with right-wing philosophy, in fact most right wing people are against any form of contribution,
And I think this is kind of the reason FLOSS works well, it can be aligned with many philosophies.
You might not like it, but FLOSS is extremely aligned with left wing ideology, where people contribute to the community because they want to and the community provides back without asking anything in return.
Any society that is not communism is not free. If your continued existence is dependant on you working for a wage you are not free. Being “free” to sign a contract that removes your rights so you can work and thus eat is not freedom.
A free society does not need to coerce you into doing things that are good for society. You do them because they are fun or fulfilling. In other words, the same reason people work on open source software.
Country is a little vague so I’ll supliment state in it’s place. I’d argue there are communist societies but no communist states. “communist states” may be an oxymoron.
A useful way to think about self described communist states is that they are attempting to build communism. Whether or not their strategies are effective is up for rigorous debate of course.
Communist societies on the other hand have existed since the dawn of humanity. I read an interesting book titled The Dawn of Everything by David Graeber and David Wengrow. They cover a variety of indigenous groups’ economies and social structures. Some could be described as communism, others were as exploitative or worse than our current society. The San tribes are a modern example of an egalitarian society or maybe more accurately a group of egalitarian societies. I’m also interested in the Zapatistas and what the folks in Northern Syria are doing but I doubt they constitue communism.
Anyway I’m no authority on these things but I hope you found the perspective interesting. The audiobook for the Dawn of Everything is fastinating and a local library might have a copy if you want to check it out.
There are no communist countries. Only Communist countries. Communism is an authoritarian state economic system that is nominally left leaning. Whereas communism is largely against states and state power, and very libertarian in the original sense.
So the answer to your question is that technically all communist countries are free. You just don’t know the difference.
No, the actual problem is that you aren’t learning. Nor are you trying to. I literally just explained to you that there is a difference between Communism and communism. And what that difference was. Your only response. Sadly to cling to the same propaganda canard.
There are no communist countries. Therefore, technically all of them are free and technically all of them are not free. Because they don’t exist. Communist countries on the other hand are socially very unfree.
I truly hope you are not a programmer despite posting from a programming themed instance. If on accident you are, my sympathies to whoever hires you. Because you show the inability to differentiate between a variable name and a variable type.
No. Literally now you are projecting. I know the reason why. And I can state it clearly. And I’ve already stated it to you. The reason is that communists don’t want a state. Therefore, the idea of a state being communist is an oxymoron. Communists on the other hand, reject parts of communism wholesale. The USSR, PRC and DKPR call/called themselves Communist. Yet they all had more in common with dictatorial juntas and fascism than they did with communism.
At this point, you are basically asserting that a string named int is nothing but an integer.
Technical correction for historical accuracy: the USSR, PRC, etc. never called their countries Communist, but were led by Communist parties that, by their own words, were attempting to build Communism. Marxism-Leninism posits the strategy of building up the productive forces via a transitional Socialist stage before reaching Communism.
I’m not an ML myself, but it’s important to understand the distinction. That’s why the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics was not the Union of Communist Republics, because even by their own admission they were far away from Communism. This is completely separate from how effective or ineffective we may analyze them to have been at achieving this stated goal, that’s an entirely separate conversation that again, I’m not an ML and am not interested in arguing.
I agree with all that. That’s all fine for a nuanced discussion between those that understand it. This wasn’t that conversation.
I’m not ML either. Staunchly anti ML generally. Because of how much they malign and damage the concept for those of us that are evolutionary and not revolutionary. That and the generally deadly outcomes they bring about as well as the childish behavior. 30 years ago, I would not have understood the distinction between the name applied to them and the concept the name was derived from either. Let alone the marginally good intentions, their roads to social oppression were paved with.
Speaking as a non-ML, reform is more useful as a means of preventing fascism than achieving systemic change. Building up parallel structures from the bottom-up, such as mass Unionization, is revolutionary and achieves more meaningful results locally than electoralism typically does. Electoralism has value, but cannot do much without grassroots organization.
Again, I agree. Though I think it’s important to acknowledge a difference between social revolutions such as unionization where workers organize to have their voice represented against much bigger powers. And Marshall revolution. Of course, when peaceful protests becomes impossible, violent revolution becomes inevitable. Which is what happened initially with many of the ML experiments. Russia overthrowing the tzar China overthrowing the emperor etc. the problem is, when the external threat was gone. They turned on themselves.
The problem is, especially where Marxist leninists are concerned. And can be readily viewed through the lens of their use of Engles “on authority” as a crutch. They were ultimately intellectually, morally bereft. Becoming the monsters they said they’d eliminate. Forcefully annexing millions without their consent. And killing many more millions simply for their dissent. Something we must acknowledge if we’re to un-hypocritically call out capitalism and capitalists.
When it comes to winning people over. We should be able to do it with words, not weapons as a rule. If you can’t, either they’re paid not to understand. Or your ideas are lacking.
Alright, now that you’ve elaborated more I’m more inclined to agree.
My policy is more anti-tendency, I simply advocate for people to read as much as possible, touch as much grass as possible, try to organize and contribute to leftist organizational structures, and continue to fight for improving material conditions.
I dont think so, that isn’t necessarily the case. I think people in capitalist economies can also contribute out of their own free will, because they have fun with the project. To put it so that they only do it not to starve is, in my opinion, too harsh. I do lots of things in this economy because I have fun with them, not because I dont want to starve. However, I think that of course the aspect “I need food” is always a factor and an influence. Just very often not the only one.
Yeah, what I said is an exaggeration. A tiny portion of the population will never have to do a day of work in their lives because they’re bankrolled by daddy. Other people will have free time because of the efforts of the labor movement. Some people are lucky to have jobs they like. But, unless you’re super rich, the threat is always there. Capitalists are working hard to roll back labor rights. You could lose your job. You’re always a few bad days away from needing to take a shit job so you can eat.
Of course capitalism operates in a lot of gray areas, it’s how it seems freer than it actually is. “I need food” isn’t always a problem, but it is one often enough to be systemically problematic. Abandoning one’s hopes and dreams because one must be “realistic” is the norm.
Well the argument “People in capitalist economies do not contribute out of free will” is something you just pull out of your ass, to define your side as the ones that will “contribute out of free will” (hence, the good side). This is the same logic you see in religious cults, where they define that themselves are moral and right, and the outside immoral. It really doesn’t deserve any serous response since there is no response that will be able to penetrate that kind of brainwash.
You’re the one applying morals where there is none.
Communism is not about morality and we doesn’t have a moral judgment of the world. It’s simply looking at the material reality of things and them formulating ideas from that, the exact opposite of idealism (religion is a form of idealism).
What that user said is an exageration, sure, but they are not far off. Your only options under capitalism are work and pray to earn enough to pay for rent, or live in the streets. There’s no choice here, you have no safety nets, no certainty.
The reality is that the biggest FOSS projects are usually bankrolled by companies that need them, not because of some moral good, but because it makes more monetary sense to do it that way.
Now for the other side, projects with no money incentive involved, where people contribute because they want too, usually are slow or in need of more contributors, precisely because, under capitalism, they don’t have enough free time, they need to worry about their full time job and all the other priorities in their lives before they can sit down and contribute some code.
Again, there no moral judgement here, it’s simply a description of the material reality.
I’m sorry, it’s just that I can’t imagine you live in the same world I do. Maybe it’s different for you, I saw you said you live in a socialist country so you may not be aware that in capitalist countries most people hate their jobs. It’s so woven into the fabric of our society I’m shocked someone wouldn’t know that. It’s the subject of jokes:
Oh, you hate your job? Why didn’t you say so? There’s a support group for that. It’s called EVERYBODY, and they meet at the bar.
– Drew Carey
Monday, the start of the work week, is generally loathed. There’s an acronym: TGIF, thank god it’s friday, the end of the workweek. Polls show 40% of people think their jobs make no meaningful contribution to society:
YouGov, a data-analytics firm, polled British people, in 2015, about whether they thought that their jobs made a meaningful contribution to the world. Thirty-seven per cent said no, and thirteen per cent were unsure—a high proportion, but one that was echoed elsewhere. (In the functional and well-adjusted Netherlands, forty per cent of respondents believed their jobs had no reason to exist.)
Anyway, I guess I’ll go back to my “religious cult,” where we separate people into good and bad categories. For instance, one way we could do that is to say that other people are in a religious cult because they separate people into good and bad categories, hence they are bad people.
Yes it is, but not in the way you hope. I live in a socialist country, but I’m still stunned about the level of the communist delusions people seems to have here.
Anyways it’s just good to know that FOSS is built upon anarchist principles (of course, this doesn’t mean every FOSS project is anarchist) and is a great example of free association in practice. It helps demystify anarchism and communism.
Also what “delusions” are you talking about? Marxist-leninist ones?
The desillusions people seems to have here is the same kind you have for religious people and moral, where the religious people claim that religion is what provides moral, and hence non-religious people cannot know right from wrong. It seems that in the same way, people in this discussion have defined that communism is the mechanism for being generous and being willing to contribute to society. Hence, all non-communist societies cannot exists, since nobody will build it. Basically, it is a very brainwashed take on communism, not based on anything existing but on some fantasy, especially since all practical attempts at communism seems to requires to strip people of all their freedoms.
When you talk about communism, are you talking about marxist-leninist / socialist states, or communism the idea(l) itself? Also how familiar are you with anarchism?
It seems that in the same way, people in this discussion have defined that communism is the mechanism for being generous and being willing to contribute to society.
You’re not far off, but yes that is more or less all that “communism” is:
a classless, stateless, humane society based on common ownership, follows the maxim “From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
There is no prescription for how this may be achieved or how it might operate. Marxist-leninists want to reach it with a vanguard party and a socialist state, and this reflects how they see revolution as an event. Anarcho-communists instead see revolution as a process, and praxis takes the form of grassroots movements, aiming to bring about the necessary social change, building systems of free association from the ground up.
First let’s setup some terminology so we’re not confusing terms.
Free means no money, or monetary value, is needed. i.e As in “free beer”
Free can also mean no obligations or reprehensions, e.g. Free speech.
To avoid confusion let’s refer to the freedom one as Libre, i.e. free beer, libre speech.
Secondly I never said communism, since communism has a hard definition imposed by their creators, I said left-wing, for the purposes of this discussion let’s agree on a middle term of socialism to mean the opposite of capitalism, or if you prefer a type of government associated with left wing parties, which involve social policies and free services.
With those definitions out of the way: Is any free society by definition socialist? It is my opinion that yes, any society that’s past the need for money it’s by definition socialist, whereas any society that uses money (or monetary equivalents) it’s capitalist.
Libre or authoritarian governments can exist on either side of the spectrum of economical policies, so if you meant to ask whether is any libre society by definition socialist? My answer would be no, you can have societies where you have freedom but things cost money. That being said I believe that no society can be truly Libre unless the basic structure and needs are free.
I understand the simplification, but neither post scarcity nor elimination of money is necessary for establishing socialism. There just needs to be a fair and even allocation of it, which mostly necessitates eliminating private ownership of capital.
Eric S Raymond (ESR) is the originator of the philosophy you’re espousing. He’s a Right-Libertarian who has made a lot of contributions to and arguments about FOSS, but in this case i think he’s pretty much wrong. He was a big proponent of the BSD license and opponent of the GPL because, in his view, the GPL interfered with economic activity while BSD was more compatible with it.
ESR’s belief was that open source software was not threatened by capitalism and that it would thrive even if large companies used it, while the other side of the argument was that it would languish if all of the large users were corporations who did not (voluntarily) contribute back. In contrast, with GPL (and similar mandatory open licenses): the corporations would be required to contribute back and thus whether the usage was corporate or not the project would benefit and grow either way.
That was a while ago, though. I think we can see, now, that while the BSDs are great (and have many of their own technological advantages over Linux based OSes) and they are being used by corporations, that has not resulted in the kind of explosive growth we’ve seen with GPL software. Gross tech bros love to use both BSD-style and GPL-style code, but with GPL they’re required to contribute back. That attracts developers, too, who don’t want to see their work end up as the foundation of some new Apple product with nothing else to show for it.
So we now can pretty much call it, i think, barring new developments: the Communist (and Left-Libertarian and Anarchist) approach “won” and the Right-Libertarian approach didn’t actually pan out. GPLed software is running servers and all kinds of things even though, technically speaking, BSD was probably a better choice up until recently (until modern containerization, probably) and still has a lot going for it. The Right-Libertarian philosophy on this is a dead end.
You didn’t write the kernel, write the libraries, or write the user space applications, did you? No, Linux is the product of a collaborative group of strangers working towards the same goal, a goal that largely doesn’t include any considerations for profit. You haven’t pulled yourself up by your boot straps to make Linux. Hell, even Linus didn’t do that. It’s the product of thousands of people working on it over decades. It’s not capitalist, it’s not individualistic, Linux is communal.
TIL: I must be a communist/socialist/leftist/whatever for supporting FOSS. What’s next? Marxism/Leninism? Or maybe I missed that stop, while riding the communism train. Then again, I’m already on Lemmy, so I must be into ML as well, right?
No one is labeling you. Though you should perhaps reflect on the world around you and maybe see that adhering to an ideology is actually just applying philosophy comprehensively to all layers of society at the same time.
You can support communist/socialist policies without being a tankie. Most rational leftists do. And yeah, if you support FOSS you support a socialist idea. Same if you support public healthcare, public education, or libraries.
Just because an idea is labeled as socialist/capitalist or whatever, doesn’t inherently make it good or bad. People like to label things to simplify complicated topics, but that shortcut isn’t always worth it. Nowadays, I hear a lot of talk about this or that being socialist/communist thing as if that makes it automatically bad. Somehow, I get the feeling that most of those people are Americans. If that’s actually true, it would make a lot of sense.
I don’t think we disagree. Just thought it was interesting how closely FOSS ideas match those of communism and socialism, even though a lot of people probably don’t view it that way.
Yes, that’s the fascinating thing. Using labeling as a mental shortcut for understanding the world is really useful, but it comes with a price tag.
It’s basically the same problem we have when labeling thins as “religion” or “some other stuff”. We might want to call something a religion, but it doesn’t quite match. We might want to label something else a non-religion, but it meets all the criteria. Those labels aren’t neutral either, so using them comes with some baggage.
Same thing with FOSS. If we label it a socialist concept, that label comes with some unfortunate connotations… Well, at least if you’re in a country where socialism is frowned upon.
If you believe, for a particular issue, that people should work together to create something that anyone can use for free, then for that particular issue you do have a socialist ideology. That’s the definition of a socialist policy, other examples of this are public education, public health care, or Universal Basic Income. You might disagree with healthcare being public, but agree that education should be, people are not entirely socialist or capitalist, each issue can have a different answer.
People, especially those in the US and Brazil, need to stop thinking communism/socialism are bad terms and look at them for what they really are and analyse the specific issue at hand.
Universal Basic Income i’ll have to disagree with (not inherently, rather in nearly all proposed implementations), look into Negative Income Tax, which to my knowledge, was purported by Milton Friedman. A notable economist, known for Monetarism, and advising Reagan during his Reaganomics thing.
Socialism has to to with collective ownership of the means of production and distribution of goods, not cost to the consumer. Goods and services may typically be free at the time of use (funded by taxes ahead of time) but that does NOT mean free as in without cost.
Again, like most of the other people in this thread, you’re confusing free as in freedom (software movement), and free as in without cost.
I agree that socialism is not the scary term that staunch capitalists seem to believe that it is. However, perpetuating misunderstandings about what socialism means will not help find a healthy balance.
Don’t we all collectively own the Linux kernel for all practical purposes, for example? Any of us can just check it out and do with it whatever we want (within the limits of the GPL).
I’m most definitely not confusing those terms since my native language uses different words for each. Read my other reply, I use the terms free and libre when I think there’s need for clarification. Since socialist policies revolve around collective ownership and public distribution there’s no meaning to saying they are libre, only free as in free beer makes any sense in this context.
Socialist policies are popular in polling. But as soon as they get called out as socialist, people shut down and revert to their mass produced programming. Capitalism good! Socialism Bad!
You’re missing the entire point of the free software movement. Free as in freedom does NOT intrinsically mean free as in absence of cost. Linux exists because of companies like Cygnus who successfully marketed the Bazaar, as opposed to the Cathedral, to investors.
Stallman and Torvalds themselves have gone on record multiple times stating the utter lack of political motivation in being able to modify the software on your machine.
Hasn’t Steam just beat its record of simultaneously online users? And while I’m sure Steam Decks contributed to this, we’re taking of numbers an order of magnitude bigger. Hell, PC gaming is doing so well that we’re seeing until then console exclusive games come out on Steam.
I think the problem is that it’s super popular for those who already own a PC and have a huge Steam Library. I got console friends wanting a Steam Deck but ultimately don’t want to buy one because it means rebuying their games.
As much as I love my steam deck and the os, I do wish it was slightly easier to install third party games.
I know it’s not hard and I’ve installed plenty, but like it’s so incredibly easy with steam that it’s made me lazy to even install games I already have on gog
It’s not Linux or SteamOS, but both Epic and CD Projekt don’t support their store client apps and launchers on Linux sadly, such we have to use unofficial ones such as Heroic Game Launcher
Really though, what were they thinking. Why would anyone risk staying with unity after all their bad decisions, especially when they clearly have no intention to stop being dumb.
I moonlight as a small app developer. This is absolutely correct. I have a handful of legacy apps which uses Unity, and makes so little that moving them would cost more.
That said, if/when I do another project, it won’t be in Unity.
Which signals to investors that there is little to no expected growth. If you aren’t attracting new customers to grow your user base, then you only have the option to milk your existing customers to increase revenue.
That may work short term, but long term it signals a death knell for the company, since as the old customers retire or the studios close down, the new crop of game developers would have been trained on or adopted a different engine so aren’t going to switch to Unity. Eventually they just run out of customers.
edit: The following is off topic, but I’ll.leave it as a testament to my gray-beardedness. In my defense: Unity isn’t Unity anymore. Don’t get old.
I’ve been using Linux for 30 years now, and for a while I was an advocate for Ubuntu and Canonical (among others, I’m pan-distributive). Then things changed: GNOME 3, Wayland, Unity, something-sonething, Snaps… All too much.
As an advocate, I’m apt not to emerge with favorites, or to yuck others’ yums. Neverthekess, Canonical is a press beyond the pale, many days.
In the end, I don’t recommend Canonical distros. LMDE is solid, as are most of the *bian and redhat downstreams. I don’t recommend the others because I don’t know them, but more importantly I couldn’t help a friend un-bodge a bad installer on them (likewise for "BSD or Darwin).
But really, no love for Canonical. They went to some Dark Side, and I’ll have a hard time forgiving them for it.
I also thought of Unity the DE before reading the article
I understand the confusion. This doesn’t belong to a Linux community. I mean, I see the relation with FOSS but I’m sure there are FOSS communities out there. The article doesn’t even mentions Linux, just Windows and Android.
With ibm working hard to enshittify redhat even faster than newredhat themselves, we should consider avoiding them as a first-class porting and work target.
Look at OpenEL as a successor to the RH and an upstream for the other ELs once RH starts eating from that tasty “free stuff they can sell” trough. Having made bank on TheForeMan without actually making an effort to support it, they have a model they can use for everything.
I went to a game dev meetup in Seoul last year. Everyone was using Unity.
I went again last month. Half the people were using Godot.
For a bit more context, I used to work in the gaming industry. We used Unity because it was great for making money - drop in ads and tracking, you’re good to go. The Godot ecosystem isn’t as mature for that yet. However, even we were considering switching to Godot. It wasn’t worth switching for a number of reasons (besides the above mentioned ones, Godot is also “laggier” and we have some heavier games), but had we started shop yesterday, it’s safe to say we would have used Godot too.
Unity just laid off 25% of their workforce. That is not a small number. Their days are numbered.
If you’re not using your pihole as a recursive DNS server that is a natural next step that ties neatly into where you’ve already gone. Wireguard can also easily run next to it if you want a lightweight VPN for when you’re away from your network.
Thanks for sharing these feature. I run pihole but knew nothing about this. As my move my implementation to new hardware I’ll definitely be adding this.
Wow, I can’t believe you tried so many different operating systems with this laptop, even Haiku and OpenIndiana! What a fantastic review!
It is a little sad that OpenBSD can’t optimize by P/E cores, I have been wanting to switch to OpenBSD but obviously Linux supports the most hardware, so I stay with Linux. It is nice that the makers NovaCustom seem to have done a good job creating a mostly open, standards compliance x86_64 computing platform.
Just in case*, I’m just the middle-man that connects this specific article by Solène to the audience on Lemmy 😅. I’m sure you’re aware of this, but I just wanted to make sure.
But yes, Solène has done an excellent work with her review! Which is precisely why I felt the need that it needed some more exposure 😜.
It is a little sad that OpenBSD can’t optimize by P/E cores, I have been wanting to switch to OpenBSD but obviously Linux supports the most hardware, so I stay with Linux.
Could you elaborate on your willingness to switch to OpenBSD?
It is nice that the makers NovaCustom seem to have done a good job creating a mostly open, standards compliance x86_64 computing platform.
Definitely! I feel as if they might be somewhat underappreciated currently, but I hope their efforts to open source will receive similar mainstream reach like what we’ve seem for System76 etc.
Could you elaborate on your willingness to switch to OpenBSD?
I have a small ZFS NAS that I built myself running Linux, and I would like to use it for file sharing and running applications like NextCloud. I prefer OpenBSD and its derivatives (like OmniOS) because it of its security-oriented features, especially things like ZFS and zones, but I have not used it very much so I am not comfortable using an operating system I have not used before for something important like backing up my files.
I would like to switch my daily driver, a Linux laptop, to OpenBSD so I can get used to using it as an administrator, but I worry about OpenBSD being able to support the laptop hardware, especially things like WiFi, BlueTooth, and managing the battery, screen dimming, laptop lid, and so on. I have another Linux computer with a Radeon graphics card which connects to my TV that my children use for video games, and watching streaming video, and I would like to switch this to OpenBSD as well but I worry that it will not be able to run Steam games very well.
because it of its security-oriented features, especially things like ZFS
Does OpenBSD’s implementation of ZFS offer security features as well?
I would like to switch my daily driver, a Linux laptop, to OpenBSD so I can get used to using it as an administrator, but I worry about OpenBSD being able to support the laptop hardware, especially things like WiFi, BlueTooth, and managing the battery, screen dimming, laptop lid, and so on.
Do you think that using OpenBSD inside of a qube (from QubesOS) is perhaps something worth considering? Or don’t you think there’s any merit of doing this over the use of any virtualization software found on any other system?
I have another Linux computer with a Radeon graphics card which connects to my TV that my children use for video games, and watching streaming video, and I would like to switch this to OpenBSD as well but I worry that it will not be able to run Steam games very well.
From what I’ve read, running games on OpenBSD is a lot less mature compared to running games on Linux. Though, perhaps it’s worth noting that cloud gaming solutions (like Google Stadia in the past) are known to work great on OpenBSD. Not sure if you would want that, though.
(On a more general note) I definitely agree that OpenBSD works wonderfully on the server side of things. But I’ve gotten skeptical over time to its feasibility as a desktop OS. Note that I’m well aware that OpenBSD’s developers use it as their daily drivers, so I definitely recognize the possibility. However, when it’s lacking features like Secure Boot (or any form of Trusted and/or Measured Boot for that matter), I just find it hard to justify putting it on something like a laptop that I carry around all the time. I hope that you can prove to me that my logic/understanding is flawed and that I should reconsider the use of OpenBSD as a desktop OS.
Sorry, I think I might have confused OmniOS with QubesOS.
ZFS is itself a security feature because of how well it guarantees the fidelity of your data. That said, ZFS support on BSD is generally much better than on Linux
For the reasons you stated, I can’t use OpenBSD on my daily work laptop, so I don’t think I will ever really have a chance to give it a fair trial or learn more about it, which is unfortunate.
Do you happen to know if this goes beyond what Btrfs(/Bcachefs) provides on the Linux side of things?
I think someday Btrfs or BCacheFS might have as many features as ZFS, but for now ZFS is still state-of-the-art, as far as I know. RAID-Z is one ZFS feature I use that is not fully implemented in Btrfs yet. All other ZFS features that I use are also available with Btrfs.
😅, but QubesOS isn’t a derivative of OpenBSD either. It might have inspired some of its parts, but fundamentally it’s a completely different beast.
Oops, I am really getting confused with all the different distros! Sorry!
have you updated EFI/BIOS recently? maybe S3 sleep is not supported on your system anymore and instead you get suspend-to-idle as S0ix (Modern Standby) notoriously shitty under linux. sometimes you can flip it back in EFI/BIOS
I have a Windows dual boot, and Windows did install some updates, and Lenovo site indicates that the latest BIOS version was released mid November, so that could be it.
linux
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.