I see. That’s not what “security by obscurity” means in my world, but the expression certainly sounds like it could. It’s not like I own the meaning of words, so it’s interesting to hear what it means to others. Could also have been meant figuratively, I suppose.
In what way does “security by obscurity” apply here?
Hadn’t heard of it before. Searched for it, and came across both Path of Diablo, and Project diablo. Some polls suggested preferring the latter 2:1. I haven’t played D2 in a few decades (sheesh). Any thoughts on comparing those mods?
“Install Linux”, is usually a hurdle for most people. We should be willing to help with that part.
Maybe this was an intentional leak. Now the Nintendo lawyers can claim they’ve used stolen proprietary code?
I suppose. If you are doing things against TOS and you suspect just might happen, by all means.
The license is with regards to “GOG Service”, not “GOG Contents”. You need the former to get access to the latter, sure. But what isn’t clear about this?
You still own the contents (though, as mentioned, individual titles may have additional blablabla). If you don’t think this distinction makes sense when it comes to GoG vs Steam, then maybe you’re just discussing something entirely different?
That’s for the gog service itself.
What do you mean? Native Linux isn’t that relevant these days. Most games run well through Proton, and some even better than on Windows. Judging by the protondb entry, you wouldn’t notice on Linux that this was a windows game: https://www.protondb.com/app/2142790
It’s not the same thing? Emulation of older consoles improve and mod the experience. Upscaling, custom textured, etc
Never thought about that angle. I don’t think I’ve dealt with this kind of manipulative behaviour myself, but I don’t doubt it.
It’s such a dangerous game to play, as the “requirements” don’t match reality. At least someone along that chain of communication doesn’t know something they should know about their job. The alternative of just being a negotiation tactic would make me consider ending the interview immediately.
Requiring 8 years of any particular tech is ridiculous in of itself. If you haven’t learned what there is to learn in 3 years, you won’t learn any more in the subsequent 5.
On a global scale, corporations could double wages, reduce hours to 80%, and it would still only match the productivity output. Only compromise would be for very few people to be slightly less obscenely wealthy.
Keep this up, and more people will wonder if a few heads rolling is all that bad.
This. Anyone actually seasoned in martial arts will back this up. Exceptions to this are trying to sell something.
Calling people stupid and lazy in nicer words is still calling people stupid and lazy.
I think that’s a bit unfair here. What I’m saying is that expectations often seems to be that “Linux should be effortless, but it isn’t, so Linux sucks”, and then we quickly talk past each other on which aspects we are referring to. Let me make up three categories:
For users transitioning to Linux from Windows, and …
So, I assume people who just thought I was calling people lazy and dumb thought I meant categories 1. and 2. I just mean category 3. If you expect everything to be the same as Windows, and the effort required to understand the differences is too much, then only Windows will fit your needs. The impression I get is a general unwillingness to “figure stuff out”. Not knowing shit is fine, complaining and not wanting to put in the effort to know stuff… how is that not being lazy?
It was intended as kind advice without any the implied judgement of calling people dumb or lazy. If you don’t want to have to figure stuff out related to the third category, Linux will likely not be a good experience, or even a productive or good change. If you move to another country, you should make the effort to learn the culture. It’s not a good look to complain that things are different.
If I were to try to suggest “a point” with all of this: Don’t suggest to people that Linux is effortless for Windows users. Linux is immensely better, in almost every way (though mind examples in first category). But, it requires learning the basics of how shit works. It’s not hard… the information is well put together and available.
People who expect an effortless transition from Windows to Linux, are better off sticking to Windows. You are expected to be able to read stuff, and make some effort to understand it. It shouldn’t be any less than what you’d expect if going from Linux to Windows.
Many things will be different. You’ll get a long way with learning some fundamentals. If you make the effort, it’ll be well rewarded. If it’s not worth the effort, stick to windows.
This was news to me as well, but I assume that the Arch Linux logo in question suggests that it might be strange to use an Arch Linux specific illustration, for something that isn’t mentioning Arch Linux.
Did that clear it up, or were you just being rude?
Use arch with AUR, and cross your fingers that at least someone checks the changes. I sure don’t.
deleted by creator