This is why I boycott Logitech
You should boycott Microsoft instead. As you say, they’re the ones permitting it.
I have to upgrade my Mint install every two years
I know you’re joking around here, but you don’t have to upgrade every two years. You can use an LTS release instead, or, on the opposite of the spectrum, a rolling release.
Release schedule and duration of support should always be factored into the decision of choosing a distro.
Save your sanity and do Settings -> Blocks -> Block instance -> lemmy.ml
I approve this comment.
Now we’ve got to fucking participate in it?
Ah yes, killing all those innocent civilians hidden in incoming Iranian ballistic missiles…
I guess it’s why some Jellyfin streams started transcoding for me.
You’re better off using the Jellyfin Media Player standalone application anyway.
A core memory of mine is getting flung off of one of these things because of the centrifugal force, falling on my back, and being unable to breathe for like 20-30 seconds … until I screamed at the top of my lungs, and things slowly returned to normal, while the teacher just went: oh you’re fine, don’t be a baby. I was 6.
Or ctrl+w to close the fucking site and never come back.
It’s apparently a hobby and to be competitive, you need to be able to spew bullshit at amazing rates. Personally I’ve maxed out at 140 wpm
I’m limited by the rate at which I can think of bullshit.
yet all I needed is a “this side up” symbol …
Doom (2016)
If you’re talking about Doom, it’s the original Doom game
Sorry but you’re not the arbiter of worldwide speech, so you don’t get to decide that. The name of the 2016 game is just Doom. If there’s a chance of confusion you can add (2016) for clarity, as I did, but it really has the same title as the original Doom game and there’s nothing wrong with just calling it Doom. Which it is.
See:
It’s like Scarface and Scarface, or Cape Fear and Cape Fear, or Dune and Dune, or … you get the point.
First of all, there really isn’t all that much story to the original Doom. There are a couple of paragraphs in a readme.txt file tucked away in the installation folder, and an ending screen after each episode… but that’s basically it.
As I understood it, Doom 2016 is a re-imagining of Doom, so the universes are not canonically linked. Kinda like how The Thing From Another World (1956), which takes place in Alaska, isn’t canonically linked with The Thing (1982) which takes place on Antarctica.
The original DOS version of Doom runs at 35fps, exactly half of the 70Hz refresh rate of 320x200 VGA mode. I thought it felt really smooth back in the day, but it does feel weird and stuttery on modern systems when played through Dosbox. I get used to it after a bit, but still.
Fortunately as Doom is open source, there are many enhanced Doom ports that lift this 35fps limit and allow it to run on modern machines without emulation. I usually play in GZDoom which can run at the max refresh rate of my monitor (144Hz), so it feels silky smooth.
Also… and I never see anyone else mention this… DOOM does not take place on Mars.
But Doom (2016) does.
I feel that many gamers nowadays mean the 2016 reboot, when they talk about Doom, and not the original from 1993. We’re getting old …
Actually lot less than the browser. Under 300MB, I just checked, and that’s mostly just the network buffer which is 150MB by default.
The point is that your example use case of “YouTube 4k videos” doesn’t need a browser full of bloated js garbage.
Just don’t compain that YouTube doesn’t play 4K videos anymore.
strange, mpv handles it just fine
I remember when I got my first computer with 1GB of RAM, where my previous computer had 64MB, later upgraded to 192MB. And there were only like 3 or 4 years in between them.
It was like: holy shit, now I can put all the things in RAM. I will never run out.
There are basically four positions you can take about this:
I am on (2), as are most historians, and you put yourself on (1).
if it’s good enough for the majority of historians
It isn’t. Historians would love to have independent evidence of the existence and crucifixion of Jesus, but there isn’t… so most historians refrain from taking a position one way or the other. The ones that do have to make do with what little objective information they have, and the best they can come up with is: well because of this embarassing thing, it’s more likely that he did exist and was crucified than that he didn’t, because why would they make that up?
That’s rather weak evidence, and far from “proof”.
Not sure why you’d need more
Well for one because the more prominent people who have studied this have a vested interest in wanting it to be true. For example, John P. Meier, who posited this criterion of embarassment that I outlined in my previous comment, isn’t really a historian but a catholic priest, professor of theology (not history) and a writer of books on the subject.