It sure is

That too yes

They either forgot because they didn’t think much of it since they weren’t completely consumed by right-wing propaganda, aren’t actual fans of the genre, or simply justify it by saying those characters aren’t human. Either way it’s a dumb argument on their part.

As long as two binaries are compiled with the same version of the Rust compiler, they are ABI compatible. Even if the compiler version differs, I’ve found that changes to the ABI are fairly uncommon. Furthermore, anything exposed through the C ABI is stable, so the problem can be circumvented if needed. It’s not the most ergonomic solution, admittedly, but with some compromises dynamic linking is perfectly feasible.

Of course not that’s just BS, they just happen to be popular in the same circles. Correlation isn’t causation and all that.

I’m talking about the possible burns from skin contact, dangerously low blood pressure when mixed with almost anything else, and the few reports of eye damage found in users of the isopropyl nitrate variant.
(Just going from what I’ve read, might very well be fear mongering for all I know, never used them)

Now I’m not saying they should be banned or anything, they can be a great tool if used correctly from what I’ve heard, but proper studies and regulations would go a long way towards making them safer. Not that it’s gonna happen with the current administration, but that’s my two cents on the matter for what it’s worth.

No that’s the issue: it’s too permissive. It allows corporations or individuals to redistribute and modify the code as closed source, which isn’t desirable for this kind of project.

Yeah the licensing is a bit worrying, but it’s not a language issue.

No, it started as a Mozilla project; it’s been independent for a long time now.
If anything I expect Mozilla to be among the smaller contributors nowadays from a purely monetary standpoint.

Waiting for the Rust haters to get unjustifiedly mad again…

Vegemite artillery when?

Aren’t there genuine health concerns with those, shitty propaganda aside?

Does that headline not sound absurd to you?

…that’s the joke…

All of which are completely irrelevant as to why games run like crap. Those things have zero impact on the game’s framerate, they only affect asset loading and streaming, and even then they do pretty much nothing from what I can see.

I’m not gonna say it’s just marketing, but it comes close imo. I personally benchmarked Ratchet and Clank: Rift Apart’s loading times between a PS5, an NVMe SSD and a SATA SSD. Literally no difference, save for the SATA one being a fraction of a second slower. And that was one of the games thar was supposed to showcase what that technology can do! (I know it doesn’t run on UE5, but it’s just an example)

UE5 runs like garbage on all platforms. You can load assets as fast as you want, but if the rendering pipeline is slow as hell it doesn’t matter, games will still run like garbage regardless.

Which? Because consoles just use AMD APUs which have the exact same hardware features as their current CPUs and GPUs. UE5 games run like crap on consoles too.

Right, that’s exactly my point. There’s no argument to be made about Linux “not being ready” in terms of hardware support because in the worst case scenario it’s not any worse than Windows, and those worst case scenarios are few and far between.

Now, in terms of software parity, sure. There’s quite a bit of stuff that won’t run on Wine yet and doesn’t have alternatives, but this discussion was purely about hardware support and that’s solid nowadays.

Oh what do you know? It’s almost as if representation in government has a purpose! Not so easy to target people when they’re not just a faceless boogeyman now is it?

Love to see it, we need more of this everywhere.

I’ve found it to be just the opposite. I’ve had so many more issues on Ubuntu and Debian derivatives than any other distro out there. Both in terms of hardware support and stability, ironically.

Bigger doesn’t necessarily mean better, otherwise Windows would be good.

• apt is atrocious and will nuke your system every once in a while if you’re not careful when installing even the most trivial packages.
• Snaps are objectively worse than any other packaging format.
• The software is never up to date and you have to go scavenge for drivers and updated kernels otherwise stuff is just broken.

There are much greener pastures out there, even if a little more niche.
Arch if for tinkerers, no doubt, but Fedora is just as simple to use as Ubuntu. The support is great since it’s backed by Red Hat and has a sizeable following. I never had issues finding what I was looking for. The only caveat is that it’s for newer hardware; not cutting edge mind you, but it may not be the best choice for a 2009 laptop. Anything that’s at most 10 years old though I’d expect to just work honestly, maybe with minimal tinkering.

The kind of people who would install Linux on their PC are the same people who’ll reinstall Windows to remove all the bloat manufacturers put on their laptops by default.

Whether or not the basics work well enough to go scavenge for drivers is irrelevant. The fact that I have to do it means it’s no better than modern Linux in that regard. It’ll boot and in 90% of cases it’ll just work, when it doesn’t you’ll need to install some drivers.

Realistically some kind of home server, but only if energy is cheap where you live.