zlg_codes

Part of Mozilla's bad decisions with Firefox generally boiled down to "we don't have someone to maintain this", or "our analytics show people don't use this".

Shit gets removed, people get upset, and they're told to deal with it. They didn't consider that the people who used the features that were removed also didn't send telemetry data, so they made a dumb decision based on incomplete and inaccurate data instead of something sane like appeal to the community and invite people to maintain or test it.

Thanks for sharing this journey! I've been considering Love2D for a while so it's important to read about the challenges others run into. You should definitely not have to package Mesa to ship a game! I wonder why it hooks so far deeply..

Coming from PICO-8 myself, I'm wondering if I should just skip the frameworks to babystep and just jump into C+SDL, or pygame or something. I like the different ways that games can be made -- like your procedural graphics not needing a graphics library.

This is relevant to my interests. What roadblocks did you run into when you attempted to build statically? I assume your goal was to have a single binary of Love2D so you can swap it around and not worry about glibc version? (As God intended imo; not religious but games should be one contained thing imo)

Am curious to see what it does to avoid a static build.

A lot of RSS/Atom is left unexposed for two key reasons:

1) Google Reader and friends disappeared, and 2) Browsers stopped supporting RSS feeds natively, including discovery of a feed.

Put the functionality back in browsers where it belongs, it could at least be used to find feeds and then you can use newsbeuter or something similar to subscribe with.

Today's web people have horrible standards, too. Who ships an entire browser to ship an application?

I'd rather not be chained to serving humans at all, thanks.

Part of that is because profit should not take precedence when making a technical decision unless you are a business.

The other part is that if we accept only things that lead to easy profit, we'll avoid all sorts of things that take more initiative but become better products. Short-term stock price chasing is not a way to make tech decisions. It's a way to make profit decisions.

I seem to be on a website where nobody can picture doing anything without taking money from someone else.

People like you must've thought science and art and writing and other shit didn't exist before currency. Like you need a monetary incentive to get a human to do anything.

Government bodies have done a fantastic job of torpedoing their reputation on their own.

If mine would act like a legitimate fucking ally and spend its money on its people instead of Israel, I'd have more respect for it.

Burning fossil fuels for X*Y travel to Z place to do the same job they could do at home, is better?

If they can do it cheaper elsewhere in the world then they clearly are not focusing on the premium values of more expensive workers.

Naturally, having native speakers with good education should be seen as better than importing. If importing is ever actually better, then one has to question the value of the education being given to the premium workers.

This style of argumentation is annoying because you're not even participating, you're looking for reasons to dismiss.

A sane system doesn't need a whole lot just to check logs. LVM and LUKS are different due to cryptographic needs. systemd meanwhile has little reason to store logs in binary format. The promises that are alleged are not concerns to anyone except enterprise.

Are you so sure it's only conservatives? I lean left and a healthy dose of skepticism is needed in science.

I've read too many abstracts and papers where the methodology sucked, the sample size was a rounding error, incorrect conclusions were made, etc.

Let's not forget it was a hokey scientist who pushed the antivax shit. His license was revoked but the damage was done.

Science needs to be good, proper science to be regarded as anything approaching the truth. That's why science is like medicine, a practice.

There's knowing about the BLS, then there's trusting that the analytics and data gathering is honest and true.

Most people know about BLS, but what reason is there to trust that data when there is an incentive to misrepresent it?

Why should we favor inertia from social mores instead of advocating better tools?

So many things get shouted down because "people will think you're weird".

Caring about good tools doesn't have to come at the cost of productivity. But just using what everyone else uses just because they use it is intellectually lazy.

Look, business is about maximizing profits and minimizing costs. Business should absolutely not be looked to as an example of an entity that makes sane or suitable tech decisions over the long term. Their goals are different from everyday users, and both are different from power users and programmers.

Why should normies suffer through worse software than those that know what they're doing? Web-based "native apps" are that worse thing.

I'm really not swayed by "we must use this turd because the alternative is nothing". "Nothing", to me, is a technical challenge and a sign I should probably start writing the thing myself.

Yes, not everyone has the skill or time to do that, but it's also no reason to accept half-baked solutions that don't take the user's system resources into account. Compute may be cheap but it's still a resource we need to use wisely. Not everyone is running a system like the developer's Macbook Pros on 5GHz wifi hooked up to fiber.

Good lord, that's crazy, haha. You'd think with all of their different frameworks, one would have been more suitable than starting from scratch with a browser tab, jeez.

I recently upgraded to 10 because of Steam requiring it in a few weeks, and it's been an adventure. Lots of crashes and restarts that I didn't ask for. I really don't know who exactly modern Windows is for, because I'm a gamer and programmer and it's not been good for either of those tasks...

Windows 7 was solid and I almost never had issues out of it. It booted and got out of the way.

All I use is an adblocker and I've not dealt with malware in over a decade. Turns out if you stay away from shady places on the Web and don't click everything shoved in your face, you can keep a clean machine.

Meanwhile, I know plenty of people WITH antivirus and other shit with utterly compromised and slow shit. We can blame the user behavior instead of the antivirus, naturally, but how do we know the AV is protecting the user and not luring them into a sense of security so that they do risky things?

I'm clearly doing something right.

> No, it doesn't. There are file arguments to journalctl. Read the manpage, sheesh.

... And how are you going to produce the journal file to read? ... with systemd. If you broke the system and it won't boot, you'll need to boot from systemd and check with journalctl because the journal can't be accessed otherwise. That usually requires a liveUSB running systemd to pull off. This is why you don't use binary logs.

Compared to `less /var/log/messages` from any Linux, I know which one I'm trusting.

I like controlling my system instead of having it controlled for me, thanks.

I will not bend to the sloppy use of words to misrepresent technology. My words are not your putty to mold.

And you don't think conditions suck for a good number of the world?

This sort of rhetoric is empty and meaningless, useful only for antagonism.

There are reasons to live that don't include being exploited for profit.

Fuzzy and misused words are pushed to muddy the semantics. Actual AI doesn't exist.

If/else, case, and while statements are basic building blocks of automation and computational logic. Intelligence is far from anything we've done with computers. It is a parlor trick looking for money right now.

"The algorithm" is going to be the next few decades' scapegoat. "It wasn't a human, it was a machine!"

"...coded by a human."

What do you think we'll gain by putting every idea into the same cookie jar?

This drive to create One True Linux is commercial behavior. People that want One True Linux want to put products on there to sell.

These people need to read the GNU Manifesto and realize they are not in the correct social structures to push for centralization.

Missed a few things, my bad.

> This. Is. The. Problem. Framing an end-user as a mentally deficient 'normie'. Why? What's the point and what's to be gained from this?

Most end-users are, okay? If anything unusual happens at the computer they come running for the nearest nerd, poorly explain the problem, waste the nerd's time when it turns out it was simple, and the most important part, they don't learn from the experience.

It also serves as a useful distinction between types of users. Normies browse the web, maybe use an e-mail client, some office software, maybe Steam or Zoom, etc.

Power users want to explore the fullest capabilities of their computer. They're going to want different software and different experiences from the normies.

Developers will want to explore how much they can do and control. That's another type of user with different needs and software preferences.

Frankly, I'm not interested in talking about the needs of average users, because more average users will cause communities to believe their software doesn't need advanced features because there are greater numbers of simple users. Flooding Linux with normies won't make the software any better. It will create an Eternal September problem where you'll get loads of criticism and bug reports and problems, but almost nobody from that crowd will have the insight necessary to help devs decide on solutions.

There really isn't any third option. Everyman software ends up toddler-fied, and bespoke software overloads the normies. Both groups cannot be served by the same software. I challenge you to find any piece of software that adequately serves both groups.

Agreed. If I couldn't write my own packages for my OS and scratch my own itch, I'd never bother contributing to the big stuff.

The appeal behind libre software is the power to go your own way. If the only way to access it was to interact with groups and get your things added through a political process, I'd have found some other thing. Too much of our world is wrapped up in processes and busywork and other empty interaction, it's a waste of time.

Give me the code, the license, a text editor, and a nice cup of coffee, and I'm good. Hold the interpersonal drama. :P

It's how the Bazaar model of development works. You're free to join a Cathedral and follow their policies if you want.

It's merely a reminder that they didn't think of it first and aren't trailblazing anything.

There have been many community controllers but I believe MS was the first to try to make a real consumer product that serves disabilities without DIY stuff. Kind of an odd stunt and a tiny market, but it appears to have made some splashes.

Sure we can 'just be happy', but we can also acknowledge that Sony didn't care about it until Microsoft did something about it. Same as they didn't care about motion controls until Nintendo busted out the Wii. Both MS and Sony scrambled to put out motion shit the next few years.

This is a problem that is meant to be solved by distros. People who don't want many choices should be using a distro that makes a bunch of choices for them, instead of pushing to remove choice from the ecosysytem altogether.

Everybody using the same software creates a monoculture which is more prone to attack than a diverse ecosystem. There's a reason Windows was targeted so much by viruses: not only was the target BIG, but it was also consistent. If you broke into one normie's Windows machine, you could probably break into the rest. You're going to have a harder time of that if you target Linux.

Also, it's libre software. Unless you pay someone to do something for you, most of it is volunteer activity. And who are we to tell someone what they should do with their volunteer time?

It's also an indictment of the dominant social structures if there are all these groups and nobody wants to join them. They could start by getting rid of Codes of Conduct that give them permission to punish you for out-of-project behavior. Try that.