Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Valve Will Not Be Officially Supporting Ubuntu 19.10+

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • oiaohm Please man just shut up about flatpak.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Jedibeeftrix View Post

      tumbleweed...?
      I haven't heard anyone willingly using any Suse distro for over a decade. It's irrelevant. Does it even match Arch with the number of packages it has?

      Comment


      • Originally posted by xfcemint View Post
        I find this amusing:

        What's common to this people? Not easy to tell. Let me try:

        - generally elitist attitude
        - shalow, frivolous mindset
        - thinking that everything is simple
        - old=bad, new=good by default
        - lack of objectivity, lack of realism
        - ...

        Any sociologists out there? Is there a name for this?
        Anyway, I'm quite interested, and will be exploring this phenomena.
        You've described the "linux" community at large. Your post brings about as much to the discussion as claiming that water is wet. Consider doing something more valuable than quoting everyone next time.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by xfcemint View Post
          I find this amusing:
          ...
          ...
          ...
          Any sociologists out there? Is there a name for this?
          Anyway, I'm quite interested, and will be exploring this phenomena.
          As it so happens I am indeed a sociology grad, but this phenomenon you're intent on exploring does not need a sociologist to put a name on it, it's a well known and very common phenomenon called know-it-all-iasis, and it usually manifests in people lacking knowledge about a given subject while at the same time being completely unaware that they lack it; common symptoms include them trying to express an uninformed (and usually laughable) opinion on said subject, and also trying to disparage other people's opinions in the process, probably because deep down in their unconscious mind they know that what they're really doing is spewing random sh*t and they're trying to cover it up by being passive aggressive about it.

          In this particular case, the core issue is that all these people are clueless when it comes to programming and they think that old-ish x32 programs from the age of the x32 dinosaurs can be refactored and recompiled into modern x64 state-of-the-art Apps (please note that the capital 'A' in an 'App' is a necessary ingredient to achieve binary greatness in 2019) all within the blink of an eye, if only the developers stop being lazy snowflakes and start doing their jobs like real men. Notions like "source code lost or damaged", "dependence on incompatible libraries", "specific architecture hacks that cannot be converted", "license hell preventing source code manipulation" etc have no meaning to them, because as already mentioned they lack the knowledge to properly understand them.

          If you need more info on this malady, please don't hesitate to ask your dear friend debianxfce, he's a real specialist on the matter. Although I'm afraid he's inevitably going to try and convince you that in order to achieve proper x64 greatness, one has to use Debian XFCE as a desktop environment to compile the new x64 binaries, because compilers generally work more reliably in XFCE as it hasn't as of yet been sabotaged by the IBM employees working at Red Hat.

          Be prepared for a fierce debate.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by F.Ultra View Post

            Having the rules written down minimizes the risk of abuse because then you have something to base a defence against, which is something that is 100% impossible with unwritten rules.

            If I ban you due to "section X" then you can mount a defence on why what you did, wrote or said does not break the rules of "section X". Now compare this with unwritten rules, there I just ban you and for whatever counterargument you might trow in my way I can always move the goalposts since there are no written rules to check.

            The "plenty of stories floating around" are mostly from when the people accused have not bothered to refute the claims and sometimes from people trying to justify why they left without telling the real story so they blame it on HR.

            So far in known history no totalitarian state have ever came from "people trying to be nice to each other" propagating throughout society, in fact it have as of yet always been the contrary. Having written codes of conduct is not implementing newspeak, people claiming that should try to actually read 1984 (it is a very good book).
            You're not getting it.

            Suppose you get banned from some project. Now you have two options; fork or work your way back in using the rules.
            • If you fork, you can go on being who you are and if your code is good some follow you from the original code base. Depending on how things work out you'll either end up with the more active branch, the dead branch or getting merged back in after settling your differences.
            • If you work your way back in using the rules you'll be that annoying person that they can't get rid of and the project isn't really fun anymore. Other people know that if it comes to it you will throw the rule book at them and likely come out on top.
            People don't always get along and in those cases it's sometimes far better to part ways instead of forcing your way back into the project and suffocating it. Community projects still have owners and you have no right strong arming your way into any project as you see fit. It's some kind of twisted kindergarten sandbox mentality where if you get into a fight you go cry hard enough to the teacher and they'll put you back in there while taking the other kid out.

            At least in my culture, calling to rules and authority to solve your problems is considered the nuclear option and if you can't work out the issue between yourselves then maybe you should just avoid each other. People are good enough at problem solving when they're really trying for rules to be a fallback measure in extreme cases. So with my values this development of rules everywhere with more and more power attached to them is absolutely disgusting.

            So no. If you get far enough to get banned then just take the hint and go somewhere else, that particular community doesn't want you there and I have no idea why you'd want to be there. People work in coding communities to relax and have fun, having strict rules just takes away from that.

            Also you don't have to look far to find stories of where downsizing caused departments to fight each other through HR.

            The part that leads to totalitarianism is having rules everywhere. Claiming that it's just "people trying to be nice to each other" is exactly how overreaching rules are implemented. Have you seriously never heard the expression "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"? The same rules you seem think will protect you is exactly what totalitarians will embrace to gain power.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by andreano View Post
              Time to recompile, would be my instinct. Do game devs delete their source code after release, or what?

              Having a dependency on a 32-bit userland is just an annoyance, and the wrong choice nowadays.
              Many do, yes. I'm a great fan of Heroes of Might and Magic 3 and they're an example. They deleted the source code for Shadow of Death and Armageddons Blade expansions, which is why the new HD version of HoMM3 only includes the original Restauration of Erathia.

              We don't need those old games to be recompiled. We just need a runtime to support them. That runtime doesn't have to follow modern development, so it should be kept separate from modern libraries.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Djhg2000 View Post

                You're not getting it.

                Suppose you get banned from some project. Now you have two options; fork or work your way back in using the rules.
                • If you fork, you can go on being who you are and if your code is good some follow you from the original code base. Depending on how things work out you'll either end up with the more active branch, the dead branch or getting merged back in after settling your differences.
                • If you work your way back in using the rules you'll be that annoying person that they can't get rid of and the project isn't really fun anymore. Other people know that if it comes to it you will throw the rule book at them and likely come out on top.
                People don't always get along and in those cases it's sometimes far better to part ways instead of forcing your way back into the project and suffocating it. Community projects still have owners and you have no right strong arming your way into any project as you see fit. It's some kind of twisted kindergarten sandbox mentality where if you get into a fight you go cry hard enough to the teacher and they'll put you back in there while taking the other kid out.

                At least in my culture, calling to rules and authority to solve your problems is considered the nuclear option and if you can't work out the issue between yourselves then maybe you should just avoid each other. People are good enough at problem solving when they're really trying for rules to be a fallback measure in extreme cases. So with my values this development of rules everywhere with more and more power attached to them is absolutely disgusting.

                So no. If you get far enough to get banned then just take the hint and go somewhere else, that particular community doesn't want you there and I have no idea why you'd want to be there. People work in coding communities to relax and have fun, having strict rules just takes away from that.

                Also you don't have to look far to find stories of where downsizing caused departments to fight each other through HR.

                The part that leads to totalitarianism is having rules everywhere. Claiming that it's just "people trying to be nice to each other" is exactly how overreaching rules are implemented. Have you seriously never heard the expression "The road to hell is paved with good intentions"? The same rules you seem think will protect you is exactly what totalitarians will embrace to gain power.
                I think that you should think this one over again because what you try to describe have nothing to do with Debian having a written code of conduct. Neither does a written code of conduct lead to "rules everywhere".

                Comment



                • Let's be clear there is something we do not know. To break all this has to have a good reason to unleash so much canonical hatred. Now since 19.04 some things in drivers were not good in my case nvidia when saving x.org as an example. But I also see that the manufacturers are not giving support they got stuck on 18.04. If Windows is a threat to the system that is said but does not give reasons and fuck more distros this will get ugly.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by DoMiNeLa10 View Post
                    I haven't heard anyone willingly using any Suse distro for over a decade. It's irrelevant. Does it even match Arch with the number of packages it has?
                    Are we back to virtual dick comparisons yet? Why don't you lazy person go and find out yourself? Too elitist? Well then, 12150:10832 for Tumbleweed:Arch.

                    Comment


                    • well... canonical walking back their statements... freezing i386 libs with 18.10 versions. Still not the way to do this. Breaks dpkg and apt.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X