Yeah, but I’m assuming there are many gains to be had if your compression method doesn’t need to be stream decoded for real time playback.

They would probably compress pretty well, I imagine.

i prefer google maps yet i still don’t want google and make do with OSM

Do you see the important difference between your example of preference and mine? My preference is a specific set of features, yours is a specific product.

fork it

Hah, I felt I already poked a dozen holes in that position. If you’d like to actually back up your position, I welcome it.

and an active discord

You keep bringing up their discord like that’s relevant to me. It’s not.

im going to overlook the problematic maintainer im going to give clout to

Yeah, I’m fully convinced you didn’t read my previous comment. For the record, I’m not downvoting you because I disagree with you, I think it’s valid to criticize others in the community for their behaviour, and I respect that. I’m going to downvote you because you’re not contributing to the discussion.

I agree they’re restrictive and arbitrary reasons and they’re also the reasons every single hyprland user has for chosing it. You have a different set of arbitrary reasons for setting your system up the way you like. It’s called a “preference”.

In order to fulfill this preference, is it ok for me to fork hyprland and call it something else? Or do I need to rewrite hyprland’s functionality from scratch and pretend it was all my idea? Can I reference hyprland during the rewrite or does it need to be clean room? Should i make a fork available for people who disapprove of the hyprland devs? But what if I’m not a good enough person? Oof, just noticing, i forgot to check the ideologies of each maintainer of the thousands of packages in my system.

I think it’s possible that the boycott idea makes more sense in a capitalist setting than a communist one. The reason we stop supporting JK Rowling or Chick-Fil-A is because being a customer directly translates to their success and thus the success of their ideology. But no one is making a profit from developing and maintaining a Linux package. In fact, typically the more people use your package, the more thankless work falls on you.

I’m simply interested in having control over my PC, and the FOSS community exists to exchange learnings and code to enable each other to do that. And like all of science throughout history, there are problematic people who contribute useful ideas, and I think we would be cutting off our own noses to reject those ideas just because they come from people we otherwise disagree with.

I’m ok if we stop giving this guy any attention.

What other well supported wayland tiled window managers are out there with smooth animations? I would check them out for sure, but I only know about hyprland.

Technically that already happened. But the OK Republicans have also been stalling and trying to get that reversed too.

Consider that it’s not intended to be helpful, but actually could be a malicious DDOS attempt. If it slows down devs from fixing real vulnerabilities, then it empowers those holding zero days for a widely used package (like curl).

Actually, the Signal protocol turned out to be fatally flawed in that, if you added the editor of a major publication to your group chat, all of your conversations would end up on the news the next day. Honestly a pretty egregious vulnerability.

Heh, I’m probably in the minority, but I like the idea of different windows “modes”. I’ve long wanted msft to make versions of windows for different users rather than a one-size-fits-all product. I just wanted it because I’m a power user who wanted something more stripped down and configurable, not a boomer who wants something that won’t act as a conduit between my ignorance and scammers.

But it’s cool, they can do whatever they want with windows now, they’ve made it clear they don’t want me as a user.

Ah, like a “stable” mode? Honestly it makes sense from a user support perspective. More locked down, more predictable, easier to secure. In the same way that you can’t hack a brick, and similarly useful.

Wouldn’t have a fentanyl crisis without an opioid crisis. Wouldn’t have an opioid crisis without late stage capitalism and the US healthcare system.

It also opens the door to experimentation too. If you’re comfortable with using a terminal to undo a change you made and restart your DM/windower, suddenly you’re not afraid of trying things out that might hang your windower.

Not working. Maybe if i do Ctrl+Alt+F3

Yeah, virtual ttys can be a lifesaver! Definitely something to keep in your back pocket.

I’m guessing you’re playing on a laptop? If so, it sounds like your Fn Lock is on. Usually laptops have some Fn key combo to turn it off, Fn+Esc is a common one.

You can always deny the survey…I would hope that means they don’t use the data anyway. But I understand the motivation if they do (not a truly random sample if people are more likely to deny on one platform vs another).

Yes, JIT is used for both, but we don’t call JITing of Java/.Net bytecode “emulation” because there is no hardware that natively runs bytecode that we are emulating. Unlike x86_64 asm, bytecode is designed to be JITed. But yes, JITing is the defacto strategy for efficiently emulating one piece of hardware on another.

When you implement the functionality of a piece of hardware in software, the software is said to “emulate” the hardware. The emulators you are used to are emulators, not because they are emulating a console (ex. N64), but because they’re emulating the hardware that was used to build that console (ex. a MIPS processor). That said, oftentimes console emulators need to account for specific quirks/bugs that were introduced specifically because of choices the console designers made. Ex. maybe the specific processor and memory they used for the N64 have a weird interaction that game devs at the time abused, and if your emulation doesn’t ensure that quirk works the same way, then some games won’t run.

At the risk of adding unnecessary detail, a VM might use emulation or it might not. The QEMU package is often used for virtualization, but despite its name (Quick Emulator) if the system you’re virtualizing matches the architecture of the system you’re running on, no emulation is needed.

\1a) In this case, it is risc-v hardware running software (built for risc-v) that emulates x86_64 hardware so that it can run an x86_64 binary.

\1b) A compatibility layer is less well defined, but in general refers to: whatever environment is needed to get a binary running that was originally built for a different environment. This usually includes a set of libraries that the binary is going to assume are loaded, as well as accounting for any other possible unique attributes in the structure of the executable. But if the binary, the compatibility layer, and the CPU are all x86_64, then there’s no emulation involved.

\2) to get a binary built for x86_64 windows running on risc-v Linux, you will need both emulation and a compatibility layer. In theory those two don’t need to be developed in tandem, or even know about each other at runtime, but i expect that there may be performance optimizations possible if they are aware if each other.

I mentioned QEMU because my first thought when reading this was, isn’t this a prime usecase for QEMU?

How can you say USA didn’t survive, just because they had a bad period?

I’ve stated pretty clearly at least 3 times now that in that specific scenario, I would consider the re-established democracy to be the same country.

You are arguing arbitrary points that have no impact on my original claim.

The inverse. You keep noting that the EU would allow a peaceful secession, but the US would not, and I’m saying that’s irrelevant now and it was also irrelevant during the civil war.

the president has the executive power, and can choose to ignore the checks and balances

Again, the inverse is true. Executive Decisions are simply a notice of intent, they are not law. Only the legislative branch can create laws. But the situation we find ourselves in is both Congress and scotus respecting the Executive Decisions as law. That was never supposed to happen. Now the state judges are trying to act as the last line of defense. This is not besides the point, this is literally what the entire thread, and my original comment is about.

I hope we can agree that “different” and “not surviving” is not the same thing!

Hah, it’s now a discussion of literal existentialism. No, I would say one could reasonably believe that “different” and “not surviving” are symonomous. The form that something existed in did not survive, and now only the new, different form exists. Ship of Theseus. If you replace every part of the old country one-by-one, once every part is replaced is it the same country or a different one? In this case, I think it’s not useful to try to claim it’s the same country.

No it’s not, according to the rules of the federation, no state is allowed to secede according to the constitution!!

Again, that’s not what justified the civil war. Again, I agree that a peaceful democratic secession should be allowed, but again that’s neither here nor there. Because here is a federal government ignoring the states’ checks/balances, and there is a crime against humanity that was justified in being stopped by the other states, not a federal government acting outside of the states’ checks/balances.

You seem to be arguing from a personal opinion of what USA should be

I am arguing based on the founding doctrine of the US and the concept of Federalism.

it always was a risk by the way the federation clearly always can trump the states

The assumption you’re making is that the federal govt was designed to have autonomy of its own separate from the states. But the federal govt was intended to only be a democratic-republically determined representation of the states’ intentions. Trump has the same misunderstanding, which is why he’s using the “activist judges” rhetoric. But by design of the US constitution, the states are intended to have checks on the power of the federal govt. Regardless of how any 2A nut interprets the 2nd Amendment, that is the actual intended purpose: to prevent a federally organized military from staging a coup. The federation was always intended to be a way for the states to hold the power to regulate themselves.

The EU is fine for now, but I could easily see them going down a road to toward the same mistakes the US made. Especially if, in response to the failure of the US, they end up organizing a centralized EU-controlled military, and then all it takes is a bit of FUD to put a demagogue into power and wield that military to oppress.