man I knew this was going to be rough when I saw him wearing a vegan shirt but god DAMN
“All Arch users are stupid vegan crossfitters who never shut up and contribute nothing to society and the only thing they ever care about is making their desktop look l33t and Arch is a horrible distro and did I mention all Arch users are stupid?”
Oh. My. Sides.
I switched from Ubuntu to Arch because I was sick of packages not compiling due to a complete lack of dependency management. I use stock KDE with zero frills and I spend most of my time hacking on open source projects. I never tell anyone what OS I use (unless they ask for recommendations for their new machine, and I’m prepared to also tell them why I personally prefer it) because they don’t care. I’m a normal guy who keeps myself to myself and hates the people who think a pretty desktop is more important than a usable system just as much as everyone else.
However, I use Arch, and Arch bad, which means I must be the most annoying person on the planet.
“All Arch users are stupid vegan crossfitters who never shut up and contribute nothing to society and the only thing they ever care about is making their desktop look l33t and Arch is a horrible distro and did I mention all Arch users are stupid?”
Spot on! You could have left out all the text after that.
You use Linux. All Linux users are elitist evangelical douchebags who make every conversation about Linux and how great it is even though it’s worse than Windows. Also you’re probably a criminal, since most Linux users are hackers, and I don’t associate with criminals.
As an open source maintainer I notice the trend that Arch uses are simultaneously the most likely to have caused the issue themselves and are always the first to blame my software.
I think these memes stem from the fact that a lot of Arch users are less experienced and spend a lot of time trying to create the “perfect” customized experience. Using Arch is a great way to get the experience, but it can be at the detriment of others sometimes.
Basically, learn to take it on the chin and move on. There’s some truth to the memes.
The 32bit libtcmalloc_minimal.so.4 that all Source 1 games ship with needs to be updated. You can symlink it to your system’s version to get TF2 running again. It’s usually only a matter of time before it starts to effect more downstream distros.
The other problem I have with TF2 is queueing for casual just stops for no discernable reason or error every time, even if I’m not the party host. But then I come back later and it works again? Only real solution I’ve found is to have my friends queue without me and then join after they’ve found a match.
See, I did all that… and then audio broke. So, I couldn’t anymore, man. I probably could’ve copied the install, kept it updated and held it for a resolution but I just don’t demand that much from my builds anymore really. I went with Mint with XFCE and haven’t had a single issue since install. I’m good. If it comes down to Ubuntu’s base, a lot more eyes will be on the problem and I’ll sort it out then.
It doesn’t take special talents to reproduce—even plants can do it. On the other hand, contributing to a program like Emacs takes real skill. That is really something to be proud of.
To be fair, while it’s the Libreboot creator’s project and they can do whatever they want with it, I can see why people are upset that Libreboot has had the “Libre” in it’s name seemingly neglected.
The FSF is an ideological organisation. It’s important that they exist. It’s also important that pure free software exists. Pragmatism is also important, but without any purity, the “extreme” of software freedom gets watered down, and so the window of an “acceptable” amount of proprietary-ness shifts as a new, less hardline “extreme” takes it’s place, if that makes sense. We should be striving for full software freedom, even if it’s currently just a dream.
Libreboot was a pure libre software project. Now it isn’t. Originally, a fork called osboot was created with the new blob reduction policy. That was fine, because it was a different name that didn’t mislead (also because nobody knew osboot as the fully free BIOS replacement). Then that policy became Libreboot policy. Libreboot is no longer fully libre, despite it having been exactly that for it’s whole life. It had an established name as the fully free BIOS replacement. It was known for that. Hence the upset.
Also, I see Canoeboot as a success. Rowe seems to be doing it out of spite, but it’s achieved what the GNU project wants. It has successfully pushed Rowe to at least provide some sort of fully free release again.
The point isn’t just pragmatism. The point is that you’re running closed source software either way. Even ideologically, running out of date closed source software because it’s built into the chip isn’t actually any better than running a current version of the same software from a drive. Maybe that distinction made sense in the 90s when mircocode updates weren’t a thing most people dealt with, although honestly even back then it was a little weird. Now it’s complete garbage. The FSF is an important organization, which makes it all the more important to call them out when they’re wasting time and money on stupid nonsense.
Wtf, I didn’t know that Libreboot wasn’t fully libre any more. I agree with the FSF’s ideology here. The only reason to run Libreboot over Coreboot was 100% FOSS, and if that’s not the case, then there is no point to it anymore.
Thanks for mentioning the other projects, I’ll take a look
linuxmemes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.