It could probably use a review comparing with Planet Coaster 2.

!business@lemmy.world

Yes, this is the way.

That misses the point. The Last of Us Part I is Steam Deck verified, but it consumes far too many resources.

Do note that I’m not just talking about the Deck. Some hardware can run it smoothly, some can’t, but in all cases, it’s an insultingly bloated pig of a port.

Sure.

You might want to subscribe to !newcommunities@lemmy.world, and browse here once in a while: https://lemmyverse.net/communities

Verified or not, I hope it doesn’t require a year’s salary of hardware and a nuclear power plant to run, like the first PC port did.

related: !sustainabletech@lemmy.sdf.org

I don’t follow Meta services, but for the record, I think you’re talking about the EU Digital Markets Act and its interoperability requirements of gatekeepers.

https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/gatekeepers_en

https://digital-markets-act.ec.europa.eu/questions-and-answers/interoperability_en

A good tool improves the way you work. A great tool improves the way you think.

I think the quote was, “I’m an egotistical bastard, and I name all my projects after myself. First Linux, now git.”

Someone with undetermined/unknowable gender would use the pronouns they/them, never he/him.

We’re not discussing what someone would use for themselves. We are discussing what someone would use when writing about a hypothetical person.

If you believe that he or him would never be used in this case, then I suggest you do some research on the history of language.

Edit to clarify: And by history, I include recent history, meaning usage by people alive today, who learned it in school not terribly long ago.

Either a male person or a hypothetical person whose gender is unknowable.

None of what you claim was done in the document being discussed.

It isn’t a fucking “convention” to push women down

No, but choosing either the male or female pronoun when writing about a hypothetical person has been the convention for a long time, and using the male one has been the usual default for far longer than any of us has been alive. It’s not to push women down; it’s a grammar compromise, and is not exclusive English.

You are misunderstanding the language as it was used, and you have jumped to a false conclusion that seems to make you so angry that you think it’s okay to publicly vilify someone… for your own mistake.

I hope things get better for you.

Good day.

Certain forms of singular they are old, but the drive to make it the general convention when referring to a hypothetical person is new.

“Personal politics” is a vague phrase that generally just means someone’s views and priorities. There is nothing pejorative about it, nor in the way he used it.

In other words, Andreas insists the OS developer be referred to as “he/him” instead of not assuming gender.

The build instructions in question follow English language conventions that have existed for hundreds of years (and are shared by more than few other languages). All he did was decline someone’s proposed change that would have applied a very new convention regarding pronouns for a hypothetical person. This is not the same as insisting that anyone refer to anyone else in a particular way.

It’s also not unreasonable. We can ask people to adopt new conventions, but we don’t get to expect or demand it.

Change to a language takes time.

It’s textbook misogyny.

No, it is not.

I followed the links to see what he actually wrote. There’s nothing transphobic or misogynistic about it.

If you are referring to some other incident, then please link it so we can see for ourselves.

I bet someone can cook up some edge cases where the newer kernel might matter.

What desktop distro doesn’t have a new enough kernel available? Even the current Debian Stable, which is nearing the end of its run, has a recent backport (currently at 6.12.9).

Thankfully, it’s not that simple.

A centralised service is an easy target for a government. (This is where Signal stands.) A decentralised one is significantly harder, because the government would have to be constantly discovering and processing every node in the network as new ones appear. (This is where Matrix stands, although it doesn’t have many public servers yet.) Fully peer-to-peer decentralisation makes it harder still, because there are as many nodes as there are users, with network addresses that often change. (Some of these exist today, but are mostly experimental with few users. Matrix has done some proof-of-concept work in this area as well.)

On top of decentralisation, tunnels like VPN and Tor can be helpful in avoiding ISP-imposed blocks.

There are a few messaging systems that don’t rely on internet service. That usually means a peer-to-peer design using some form of radio link, which can work well for local gatherings (like protests), but these tend to be impractical for general use.

Note that I said the network can withstand such things, not that it guarantees your connectivity to it when using a hostile ISP. No internet messaging service can do that.