EarlGrey

joined 4 months ago
[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago

As long as you're cool being a bit more restricted in multiplayer games (a lot work great! But some developers are blocking linux), and you're okay with AMD (nvidia is improving though), gaming is basically on par with Windows at this point.

In some cases it's even better. I have a few games that require weird tricks to get it to work under Windows, but work fine in proton. Even Elden Ring at launch ran better on linux because it didn't have the micro-stutter issue.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I say "easily" because it wouldn't require a major effort on the scale of coreutils. It could just be a series of fancy automation scripts. It'll take effort, but not the most intense of exercises.

I made a handful of them at an old job because we had a few specific tasks that we would regularly do, but not enough to commit it to memory. I just spent an afternoon here and there slapping together python scripts with just the options we would need and tossed it into /bin

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Oh Rust is great, and it's on my learning to do list...but its evangelists are annoying as shit.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

The great thing about the core philosophy of unix is that you could easily do what you suggest and maintain compatibility with applications that rely on the traditional coreutils (Which is the major reason why no one will really suggest changing the traditional syntax. It'll break way too much.).

Just build a series of applications that actively translates your "less ambiguous" commands into traditional syntax. I've done it for a number of things where the syntax is long and hard to remember.

In fact I think a "nuutilus" would actually be fairly well received for distributions that are more new user focused and a pretty worthwhile endeavor.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 2 points 2 months ago (4 children)

It's definitely more intuitive but It would drive me insane having to type that all out.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 16 points 2 months ago (4 children)

But dude, bro, we could put the entire system on the blockchain man, and make it super efficient with an AI backend that will remove all errors bro.

Dude it's not even written in Rust bro. WTF is this dinosaur shit?

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 2 months ago

The "Story Points = Hours" hits so goddamn hard. Like, tell me you don't fucking understand scrum without telling me you don't understand scrum.

We had a nice, effective production process on my team until a middle manager assigned to communicate with us started in with the whole "We can't spare this many points" bullshit.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 14 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

My criticism is that it largely ignores the primary advantage of Fediverse services (Decentralizing services that are designed to operate Centrally), while mostly explaining what I've always considered to be the most pointless feature (Cross Service posting).

It's a mildly neat feature if you want to centralize your entire social profile under one account (which is my security nightmare but you do you), but its not really fundamental to using federated services and its implementation can be inconsistent and confusing.

Maybe have a bunch of "Lemmy" (or whatever) nodes arranged in a circle, the same color, with the same icon, and connected to each other through the middle of the circle (not connecting to the "fediverse", although I guess you could have a transparent "Lemmy" super imposed over it) Then have the users connected to each node. Or something...I'm on a bench and just broadly visualizing it.

The next trick is explaining the fault of centralized services in a graph.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

Requiring someone to have an account on a federated instance would mitigate a fair amount of spam and ease moderation.

What would that solve that mandating accounts for a standard wiki wouldn't?

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Can you elaborate on "discoverability"? Finding individual subject wikis has never been a particular problem for me. Even ones that don't use Fandom, provided they are at least active. Just googling " wikia" (I know. I can't let it go) always gets me what I need.

Can't say I see an advantage to universal accounts (I see more disadvantages), but if that's the big selling point and people really want it. I'm not opposed to having it, i've just always treated it as a mild novelty I never use.

As for decentralization, it has already been solved by MediaWiki. Which is GPL and (can be) self-hosted.

[–] EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de 5 points 2 months ago (5 children)

What benefit would federating it bring?

The ability to self-host your own FOSS wiki already exists and has for over two decades. It's called MediaWiki.

You could have federated accounts I guess but do editors on the Doctor Who wiki really need the ability to see posts on Mastadon or edit pages on the That 70's Wiki?

view more: ‹ prev next ›