That was the first thing I noticed when I recently went back to messing with Linux distros after 15 years. Booting into Ubuntu and having to use Gnome Tweaks or whatever it’s called for basic customizations was incredibly confusing considering Linux is touted as being the customizable and personal OS. I doubt I’ll ever give Gnome another try after that.
I get the impression gnome3 is loosely a clone of osx, I much prefer a windows-esc desktop. I’ve never tried kde but feel pretty at home with xfce or openbox. YMMV, but if you have the time they’re worth trying if you’re a recent windows refugee.
GNOME is a much closer match for iPadOS than it is macOS due to how far it goes with minimalism, as well as how it approaches power user functionality (where macOS might move it off to the side or put it behind a toggle, GNOME just won’t implement it at all). Extensions can alleviate that to a limited extent, but there are several aspects that can’t be improved upon without forking.
Since this is a Wayland thread, obviously the problem is a lack of a common implementation, which deviates from UNIX tradition.
For those who want to complain how lack of choice between multiple implementations is an obvious problem and deviates from UNIX tradition, please wait until the next systemd thread.
If someone is paying you to implement a security vulnerability and you've told them and you don't have liability, you just do it. That's how capitalism works. You do whatever people give you money for.
I wasn’t referring to vulnerabilities, I was referring to arbitrary silly security theatre controls. But id hate to deal with you professionally. Gross.
It is irrelevant, if both are available as base package.
I guess you want to point out that choices are subjective.
That subjectivity is relevant within their classes (air—food-water, security-health-plumbing-heating, smartphone-car-vacation, yaht-designerBrands)
Definitely there will be one person who choses to die, just to get latest smartphone, but most people will not.
These classes get less clear/useful as you go up, but most people will agree on the basics.
Tangent: it is important for me personally for my neighbour to have the basics (and more), as that increases my basics like security, sanitary conditions.
it's not. An economy where only a select few benefit from the GDP (e.g. via stocks - the richest 10% of Americans own 93% of the stocks!) is not a "quality of life" measure at all.
It's not a good one though, because weird effects like the AI bubble incest investment web artificially blow up the GDP, and because it doesn't reflect the economy "feeling" the population experiences.
To expand on the latter point - say you have automation enabling more economic growth. A significant amount of people lose their jobs, others are afraid they'll be the next ones on the chopping block, and people hold their money together as a result - if you ask general people on the street or in representative surveys, you'll get the feedback that the economy is going to the dogs, but "the numbers" don't reflect that.
The purpose of the naming is generally to overwhelm consumers and drive long term repeat buys. You can’t remember if your tv has the fitzbuzz, but you’re damn sure this fancy new tv in the store looks a hell of a lot better than you’re current tv and there really pushing this fitzbuzz thing.
Cynically, I think its a bit, just a little, to do with how we handle manuals, today.
It wasn't that long ago, that the manual spelled out everything in detail enough that a kid could understand, absorb, and decide he was going to dive into his own and end up in the industry. I wouldn't have broken or created nearly as much, without it.
But, a few things challenged the norm. For many, many reasons, manuals became less about the specification and more about the functionality. Then they became even more simplified, because of the need to translate it into thirty different languages automatically. And even smaller, to discourage people from blaming the company rather than themselves, by never admitting anything in the manual.
What I would do for a return to fault repair guides [0].
Another factor is the increased importance of software part of the product, and how that changes via updates that can make a manual outdated. Or at least a printed manual, so if they're doing updates to product launch it might not match what a customer gets straight out of the box or any later production runs where new firmware is included. It would be somewhat mitigated if there was an onus to keep online/downloadable manuals updated alongside the software. I know my motherboard BIOS no longer matches the manual, but even then most descriptions are so simple they do nothing more than list the options with no explanation.
Going a level deeper, more information can be gleaned for how closely modern technology mimics kids toys that don’t require manuals.
A punch card machine certainly requires specs, and would not be confused with a toy.
A server rack, same, but the manuals are pieced out and specific, with details being lost.
You’ll notice anything with dangerous implications naturally wards off tampering near natively.
Desktop and laptop computers depending on sharp edges and design language, whether they use a touch screen. Almost kids toys, manual now in collective common sense for most.
Tablet, colorful case, basically a toy. Ask how many people using one can write bit transition diagrams for or/and, let alone xor.
We’ve drifted far away from where we started. Part of me feels like the youth are losing their childhoods earlier and earlier as our technology becomes easier to use. Being cynical of course.
That doesn't preclude clearly documenting what the feature does somewhere in the manual or online. People who either don't care or don't have the mental capacity to understand it won't read it. People who care a lot, such as specialist reviewers or your competitors, will figure it out anyway. I don't see any downside to adding the documentation for the benefit of paying customers who want to make an informed choice about when to use the feature, even in this cynical world view.
Why let a consumer educate themselves as easily as possible when it’s more profitable to deter that behaviour and keep you confused? Especially when some of the tech is entirely false (iirc about a decade ago, TVs were advertised as ‘360hz’ which was not related to the refresh rates).
I’m with you personally, but the companies that sell TVs are not.
The ISP's blackhole the IP for some blocked domains. So changing your DNS to 8.8.8.8 will resolve the domain, but the IP won't work. A VPN avoids this, since the traffic goes via the VPN IP.
I remember hearing someone complain on HN of their site getting blocked because it shared an IP with an illegal soccer livestream. I can’t imagine they’re doing this to IP blocks owned by CDNs like Fastly, CloudFlare, or CloudFront though. Or are they? Does this regularly break most of the internet for UK customers?
TBH it is not ALL cloudFlare IPs but a significant quantity of sites using and not using CF CDNs. You cannot imagine what a pest that is even for legit users of legit collateral damage pages. CloudFlare is in the courts appealing/countering initial court allowance to blockade and ISPs are bound to comply to blackout requests. You can look at https://hayahora.futbol (traslation: is there soccer match now?) to see affected domains.
While I am not some reputable source per-se, I have some tailscale presence over there and can corroborate my exit nodes find cloudflare sites blanket blocked on weekends.
Cloudflare works with the UK government to facilitate blocks within their infra, I assume in exchange for being allowed to access UK network infrastructure.
In the case that a blocked site resolved to a Cloudflare IP, it would likely be kicked off of Cloudflare, or geo-blocked for UK users (by Cloudflare).
Ironically that url is forbidden for me, I was under the impression that CF were fairly anti censorship, or at least they inferred that they should not be the one calling the shots (in reference to kiwifarms)
reply