It’s like a page worth of instructions you can follow verbatim excluding bootloader and network. If you watch one video of someone doing it to fill those gaps there is nothing to it.
Source: I watched Kai Hendry speed install arch, bookmarked the video and all my machines are now arch “from scratch” in 10 minutes or less of actual keyboard time.
I don’t remember the channel anymore, but there’s one guy constantly updating various setups. Like Arch with encryption, Arch with BTRFS, etc. I started with one of those videos and wrote my own step by step guide. Now I’m just following my own guide whenever I install Arch.
I think calling it “a page worth” is understating it somewhat, especially if you want a full install to actually use stuff. In reality, when installing at first, you’ll be finding stuff you missed for a while, like hardware video decoding.
Also, are you referring to just the direct instructions for one choice? Because to me, the point of installing manually is educating yourself on the choices, choosing one that suits you, and understanding what you’re doing to set it up. Of course, when you’re doing subsequent installs, you already know that stuff - but at that point you might just want to write an install script instead of running them manually.
Getting really tired of this “the fediverse needs to cater to normie interests because we’re here now and it’s what we deserve” attitude. If you can’t find a community to click with, you can always create one, join one you don’t know much about with an open mind, or don’t use the fediverse if it doesn’t have the content you like. Sorry to say it but you’re not special and no existing users on any social media platform is obligated to go out of their way to make you feel comfortable on the platform.
Same with the “your open source, community developed platform/client sucks! I demand you make the UX better because I the user deserve better! No I’m not going to donate to your development fund because you suck and need to be better before you deserve my money!” sentiments that I see on Lemmy more and more now. Seems like everyone just expects corporate level user experience and customer service from people developing open source software mostly for free as passion projects. Even after the numerous corporate boondoggles that drove people to the fediverse in the first place people aren’t the slightest bit willing to change their paradigms regarding how social media should be run.
The small community here is what makes it good. I prefer to gatekeep even more to prevent “low quality” users who think they’re entitled to everything.
You forgot “Lemmy is developed by tankies so someone that isn’t me should fork it and work their asses off so I feel more comfortable for some reason.”
Communist who believe that any criticism of china is racism, think the ussr did nothing wrong and a lot of them support Russia in the Ukraine war at the moment
One can sternly address serious mistakes by a subordinate without being outright mean about it. Doing so calmly and seriously is usually more effective anyway.
Yeah, maybe left kernal development (like Linus indicated he may have done to various people), maybe that person was traumatized. But alas, there’s no other way to let a human being know they made a mistake without making exaggerated personal attacks.
They are literally interacting with the dudes life work, and apparently shitting on core rules. No surprise he got heated. It’s not just a job to that dude, it’s like he slapped his mother
All attacks were related.to the professional output (the code, and the ability to code)
Nah my man. No excuse to act like an ass like that; life’s work or not. That’s simply a sign of poor emotional maturity, and is (plain and simple) abusive behavior. People make mistakes, regardless of the severity of the mistake. Let’s put it another way: would you be okay with someone talking to a child that way? If not, why is it okay to do so to an adult? Just because we’re older, doesn’t mean we deserve it.
Very good point. Berating someone for making a mistake does not help either party. Even more so, when the one screaming doesn’t actually mention what went wrong, so you can correct it next time
Yeah, it’s kind of invigorating to see somebody speak so plainly. No “There’s a couple issues we should maybe discuss”, no “Let’s loop back on that sometime”, no “Hmm, is that really the best approach? Do you have any documentation?” Just a straightforward “Dude, this is shit! Here’s some reasons why!”"
Having worked for a decade in tech, I would love it of people were this direct.
Well that’s pretty hilariously ironic. I’m nothing like this, I wish I were more comfortable being direct. But meanwhile, you heap abuse on me and threaten to beat me up because I said “boy, it’s nice to see someone speaking directly”. You’re much worse than Torvalds, and I completely agree it would be a terrible idea for us to ever work together. Or for you to work with anyone else, for that matter.
Having worked in tech for two and a half decades, and in places that were this direct - no thanks. There’s a fine line between being clear and direct, and being toxic - what Torvalds did here was toxic, and in many workplaces of today would be classed as bullying. Being subjected to this ‘directness’ for any given amount of time will do a number on most people’s personality and self-esteem. People don’t improve themselves if all you do is shit on them.
Agreed. I think it’s amusing to observe. Being around it yourself is quite difficult. Being the target of it sucks and having your peer go off the deep end and finding a way to reel them in sucks too.
Fair. I’ve worked in tech for just over a decade now, and I’ve only been in the polar opposite environment, and found it sorta suffocating. Everybody knows this guy is pumping out crap, and every bug in the system comes from his part of the code, but well…if anybody says it, or even hints it, they’re being unnecessarily confrontational, and nobody ever gives anything but positive feedback in peer reviews.
I feel, from my limited experience, like the 90s might have been peak machismo rock star hacker work culture, and the pendulum has now swung to the very far side.
It’s perfectly possible to say “this is unacceptable, we never break userspace. Mauro, your change is obviously what is breaking userspace because …” without adding “SHUT THE FUCK UP” or “[all of this is] TOTAL CRAP”, i.e. being direct without being derogatory.
I mean, that’s fair, and as was pointed out elsewhere Linus has sought help for his temper.
On the other hand, for all the talk of how “unprofessional” it was for him to behave this way, he did shepherd an OS kernel from a hobby project to the most popular OS on the planet (with the possible exception of Minix, apparently…)
I agree that polite directness might be better, bu IMHO the more common polite indirectness and avoidance of any hint of conflict is clearly worse.
I read a lot of frustration in that post. I don’t know if that frustration was warranted, but I’ve been in (non-tech) leadership where you almost just have to scream like this to get the point across.
“This is incorrect. Here’s why. 1. 2. 3.” no need to be disrespectful, no need to make it even call it a fuck up. either the individual has the maturity to grow or …not. but then… I certainly understand the frustration. There’s just some people… that definitely struck a nerve of the ‘you don’t get it, do you?’ variety. like the guy who told me (working contract security), that it was illegal for us to make them go outside in winter, because below-freezing is too dangerous. (yeah. We, uh, provided them with some fairly good parkas, and had hats and gloves available. with ‘if you need more’ accommodation already mentioned.)(Oh, and he was only needing to be outside for about ten, or so minutes.)
With Microsoft, any love shown could well be the Embrace part of the strategy that will lead to Extend and then Extinguish just as soon as they can figure those parts out. They might already have a plan.
The fact they've been able to turn things to their advantage so far does not mean they don't have such a plan. Or won't ever have one.
I actually have some telemetry enabled on my system, cause I want the maintainers of my distro to have more data to base their decisions on. I always disable everything for proprietary software though, and I dislike opt-out systems.
I only enable telemetry for software provided by nonprofit organizations that are legally obligated to publish detailed financial records. Never give anyone that reserves the right to sell you out any of the benefit of your data for free.
Is Canonical actually doing that, though? Collecting data for product improvement purposes and collecting it to potentially sell to third parties are two wildly different things, and doing the former, even with the user’s consent, does not mean you automatically reserve the right to do the latter (or anything else, really) with the collected data, unless you explicitly already include that as an option and get consent for it as well. I haven’t looked into it myself, so I might be wrong here, but I’m guessing Canonical would be getting way more shit for this if they were actually reserving the right to outright sell the telemetry they’re collecting, rather than just use it for product planning and development.
I can’t remember where I read this but I saw somewhere that open firmware is forbidden in things like cellular modems because it might be abused to disrupt communications. I think that’s bullshite, though.
Isn’t this actually more likely to happen if it’s closed-source, since the code isn’t visible to third-parties like security researchers? That’s why zero days are a thing.
Different countries regulate the radio spectrum differently, so transmitting on a certain frequency might be legal in country A but illegal in country B. They don’t bother making different radios for different countries, though; instead, they just build hardware capable of transmitting on all the frequencies and then restrict what it can do via the firmware. The argument goes, if they allow device owners to modify the firmware, then they might modify the radio to transmit illegally. Never mind that there are myriad other ways an attacker could do that, that are almost as cheap and easy…
In additional to the other comment, I think there’s also a traditional fear of corruption in open source. If the code is public then malicious parties are free to read and take advantage of holes in the security. Secondly it would be possible to contribute code with secret functionality that goes unnoticed. These are fairly easily debunked but seem to remain in people’s heads.
Ugh I hate these arguments about giving bad actors easier access. Bad actors are going to figure out flaws and security holes whether it’s open source or not. Security through obfuscation is a temporary measure and having more eyes on the source means more chances for good actors to find flaws and publicize them for fixes.
In theory, yes, you could make a mess, and any firmware is supposed to be certified to allow the device to be used.
In practice, this has been a convenient excuse to keep a whole chip with a separate OS in every smartphone, and it is very difficult to isolate from the rest of the system (see Graphene OS efforts).
I say all firmware should be opensource. Whether you’re allowed to change them or not is a separate question… for now.
If everything that might cause disruption was forbidden, we wouldn’t be allowed to do anything. Even normal user traffic in high enough quantities can cause services to go down. No malicious intent involved.
Easy, since it’s open source, anyone could, if they’re inclined, edit the code to do something just differently enough to cause a problem, or unlock features they’re not supposed to have access to, or spoof something that they shouldn’t be able to spoof.
This was a big argument against Windows getting a full Unix style socket in Windows 10, I believe. MS did it anyway and basically nothing changed. The blunt realty is that if an attacker is so inclined, they will find a way. Whether anyone wants them to or not. In the case of Unix style sockets, simply pushing the attack onto a Linux VM running on the windows system is usually enough, at most, moving the attack to a Linux or Unix system is also pretty easy but requires additional hardware (even a raspberry Pi) to complete.
As simply as I can, there’s enough software defined radios out there that you can hack to accurately spoof a genuine (closed source) device with enough effort, that this argument dies on the table to anyone with the technical knowledge to know what it actually means. It’s the same argument as outlawing guns. If you outlaw guns, only outlaws will have guns; which is also total horseshit in it’s own right, but makes a point. They’re making it hard for people (the non-malicious public) to get access to services in the way they want on the basis that it would “make it easier” for hackers to do the illegal. While it may be true that hackers will be able to do some things easier, by not requiring specialized hardware to do whatever malicious thing they want, they’re effectively punishing thousands or hundreds of thousands of people who are not malicious and want open source by prohibiting it, just to make the small number of hackers work harder to do things.
Fact is, if they allow it, they need to invest time and effort into implementing safeguards to ensure that any abuse is caught and stopped. They don’t want to put in that effort. The idiotic thing is that they need to put in those safeguards anyways because other tools exist that can still attack in the same manner. So they’ve saved themselves nothing in the prohibition, made the job of malicious hackers “harder”, and punished a large percentage of their client base for no good reason.
A lot of Linux drivers are like this - just one or two people maintaining them. They usually eventually mainline the driver rather than having a separate Git repo though.
It’s mind boggling just thinking that things like this depend on the effort of one or two guys… while on the other hand, it’s not so uncommon that a team of engineers and developers fails to deliver a working (mostly) bugfree product.
I think management is who is responsible for the shitty decisions, as always… and, in general, just holding the team back.
The thing with drivers is that the hardware they’re written for doesn’t really change. A particular network card is always going to behave the same way. Once the driver works well, it’s pretty much complete, and the only changes that are needed are bug fixes, updates to handle new firmware, or adjustments if the kernel changes some implementation detail of how drivers are used. There could be months or years between updates to the driver.
Some manufacturers have great first-party Linux support. Intel is a good example - they contribute a lot of code to the kernel, and their drivers are maintained by employees.
There could be months or years between updates to the driver.
Yes, but someone still has to implement that “a thing or two” in it every few years.
Some manufacturers have great first-party Linux support. Intel is a good example - they contribute a lot of code to the kernel, and their drivers are maintained by employees.
Agreed. But, to be honest, most aren’t. Just take a look at Realtek. There’s bound to be at least one chip made by them on your board (in most cases, two, LAN and audio, two very crucial pieces of hardware).
Realtek NICs are junk (even the buggy Intel I225-v chip is better) so I try to avoid them, but I honestly haven’t ever checked which sound chip my motherboard uses. I’ll have to check if it’s a Realtek one. Realtek is generally the lower-end manufacturer for cheaper products.
Realtek is basically on every retail motherboard manufacturer. Gigabyte, Asus, MSI, Biostar, ASRock, etc. If you’re talking about hi-end or server grade motherboards, yeah, but let’s face it, the chips are cheap so they’re practically in every household.
I’ve got a “ASUS ROG Strix B550-F” which wasn’t exactly a high-end motherboard when I got it (I got it because it was cheap), but it’s got an Intel chip rather than a Realtek one. The lower-end motherboards have Realtek NICs but I usually don’t get the cheapest of anything since there’s usually a pretty big difference in quality if you spend just a little bit more.
The Intel I226-V chip on that motherboard is only $2.87 each (for quantities of 1000, even cheaper for large bulk orders) and the manufacturer can likely use the same PHY chip and timing components, so it doesn’t really increase the price a lot to use a non-Realtek chip.
ROG is a Republic Of Gamers edition motherboard… it’s probably a lot more expensive than the lower end models (like my Z97-K board for example… and that wasn’t cheap as well, like 100€ back in the day).
I guess the definition of “cheap” varies from person to person. My definition of cheap is lower end (50, 60€ tops) motherboards. I don’t buy those either, but make no mistake, they’re a common household item in 3rd world countries (I can vouch for that).
I have no idea what the prices are for a Realtek NIC vs. other manufacturers. All I know is, they’re usually the default choice for cheaper models… which probably means they’re dirt cheap. Have no idea how this compares to Intel or other manufacturers (Marvel, Qualcomm, etc.).
In general, yes, those NICs are cheap. But, let’s take USB to Ethernet adapters. I don’t think Intel has a solution for those things… or if they do, it’s probably more expensive than the one Realtek offers. It’s $5 on AliExpress. They’re not great, but they get the job done (no wifi, no onboard etherent plug on a brand new laptop, and you need internet to get it up to date with drivers). I haven’t looked for anything else since this one does a great job, but I guess that, even if there is an Intel based solution out there, it’ll be at least tripple the price of the Realtek one.
You need to be a horrible person to become a billionaire
And to STAY a billionaire. If you have immense power to do good, and every single morning you wake and choose not to, you are an evil ghoul driven by greed, period.
I love how so many of them demand love and acclaim for claiming they will give their money away… when they die.
You want me to sing your praises because you won’t use the money you made exploiting countless laborers and lobbying government to benefit yourself above society to anoint a handful of nepo babies to wield that power after you as some part of a new nepo dynasty? Gee thanks?
Its like a serial killer promising not to train his children in the family business. Its not doing good, just doing slightly less bad. Except billionaires cause damage on a far greater scale.
If he’s willing to trample all over people, exploit them, and have them die for his sake, then absolutely.
Billionaires don’t care about people. They don’t view others as human. To them workers are robots, a statistical means to an end. Who cares if someone dies in some factory/warehouse somewhere? There’ll be another to replace them before the end of the day.
A billionaire gladly takes the effort of others and claims it as their own. They go out of their way to do it.
That’s not to say that every evil person acting like this will automatically become a billionaire, but you need to be OK with doing these things in order to get there. A billion USD is such an insane sum you cannot legitimately accumulate that without hurting people in the process. Like there’s no logical way of actually earning that amount of money. That’s money you take.
Joke aside, apparently she has a hard time spending enough money to lower her net worth (currently at $40B). Which is an absolutely bonkers amount of money, no one ever should have that much.
She married him in 1993 way before Amazon happened, maybe he wasn’t a gigantic ass back then. I don’t know much about her, but she seems decent from what I can see, she has donated massive amounts of money to charitable causes.
Try btrfs, where with only 5 hours of research you can create a swap file without writing the entire file.
Also there is no other option, the 5h are non-optional.
After doing that twice, In my / now lives
/swapfile-howto``# this is btrfs not a normal file system. # We have to create and allocate the file in a btrfs friendly way, # and tell btrfs to not move or segment it. touch /swapfile999 chmod 600 /swapfile999 truncate -s 0 /swapfile999 chattr +C /swapfile999 fallocate -l 999G /swapfile999 mkswap /swapfile999 swapon /swapfile999 -p 200
linuxmemes
Top
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.