I’m not against AI itself—it’s the hype and misinformation that frustrate me. LLMs aren’t true AI - or not AGI as the meaning of AI has drifted - but they’ve been branded that way to fuel tech and stock market bubbles. While LLMs can be useful, they’re still early-stage software, causing harm through misinformation and widespread copyright issues. They’re being misapplied to tasks like search, leading to poor results and damaging the reputation of AI.

Real AI lies in advanced neural networks, which are still a long way off. I wish tech companies would stop misleading the public, but the bubble will burst eventually—though not before doing considerable harm.

Maybe I’m cynical but I feel like this is suspicious timing to release this information a day after videos of his memory issues in 2023 surfaced. Feels like a cynical attempt by his PR team to change the narrative.

In all honesty, an 82 year old man having prostate cancer is not very surprising. It is a personal issue and I have sympathy but it’s frankly not important to the world. A US president with memory issues concealed from voters and his own party in 2023 when it could have seriously changed decisions about the Democratic party nominations is surprising. That is an issue for everyone and very important to the world.

It doesn’t need any organisation; there are plenty of right wing apologists and zealots who are motivated enough to vote. People can’t really vote “against” Israel so it’d be very easy to distort the vote if even a minority of people are focused enough to vote for one country. Israel’s song wasn’t terrible but it was pretty bland ballad and the televote result was patently ludicrous. But also none of the other songs were that great this year which would make it even easier for a concerted effort to win the televote.

Extreme example in the other direction is when Ukraine won in 2022. The song wasn’t particularly good but Europe coalesced around voting for Ukraine. Even the Jury voting that year was distorted in Ukraine’s favour. It didn’t need any organisation.

• 1 Pixel 6a
• 1 personal desktop, 1 work desktop
• 1 personal laptop that I never use (9 years old)
• 1 HTPC in my living room
• 1 RPi5 (running home assistant)
• 2 Boox ereaders of different sizes
• 1 Lenovo Tablet that I never use (6 years old)
• 1 Steamdeck
• 1 Google TV stick (rarely used)

All except the work desktop run Linux or Android.

I use OpenSuSe on my desktop and laptop, and Nobara on my HTPC. Rasberry Pi OS on the RPi5.

My desktop is my own build, with a ryzen 7 and 3070 gpu, 64gb ram.

Aside from my phone, I use my HTPC the most, Desktop second (including often to stream games to the HTPC), and the larger boox ereader. Don’t use the laptop unless traveling and even then don’t always bother to take it; to the point I’ve decided not to replace it despite its age until it dies. I do take the tablet when travelling but most of the time its unused.

The HTPC I use to game, stream online and home libraries, and browse the internet. Its largely replaced my steamdeck, allowed me to game on my desktop PC from my sofa and largely made my Google TV device redundant.

Many are suggesting deleting the Windows partition and resizing the Linux one, but another option is to back up your data and do a fresh Linux install.

During setup, you can delete all partitions and create new ones—ideal if you want to separate the root system and /home folder. Keeping system and user data on separate partitions makes future reinstalls easier, as your personal files can be preserved.

This misses the step where you delete the windows partition - between steps 4 and 5. You have to delete the NTFS partition and resize your linux partition to fill the empty space.

You can also create a new linux partition if you wanted as a separate space to store stuff.

I’m not sure why this is being downvoted—you’re absolutely right.

The current AI hype focuses almost entirely on LLMs, which are just one type of model and not well-suited for many of the tasks big tech is pushing them into. This rush has tarnished the broader concept of AI, driven more by financial hype than real capability. However, LLM limitations don’t apply to all AI.

Neural network models, for instance, don’t share the same flaws, and we’re still far from their full potential. LLMs have their place, but misusing them in a race for dominance is causing real harm.

The rating is only about whether SteamOS will run the game and its middleware. Its not about how well the game runs on the hardware or with the inputs for the device.

Its basically like saying its compatible with Windows or MacOS - it will work with SteamOS if its SteamOS verified. It is an OS compatibility rating; slightly more than it just working with proton or linux to include “game functionality, launcher functionality and anto-cheat support” according to the steam announcement.

Whereas Deck Verified means it specifically works with the Deck hardware too, including satisfactory performance and inputs.

https://steamcommunity.com/groups/steamworks/announcements/detail/532097310616717411

I think if Starfield had come out 10 years ago it would have wowed people and been a classic. But now it just seems dated when you have other games doing RPG better (Cyberpunk 2077, Witcher 3, Baldurs Gate 3) and open world space better (No Mans Sky).

Starfield doesnt do RPG as good as those games, nor does it do open world space as well as No Mans Sky. I’ve heard it described as being as wide as an ocean but as deep as a puddle, and that doesnt seem far off to me.

I really hope Bethesda have paid attention and dont make the same kind of mistakes with Elder Scrolls VI. Big and empty is not the way to go.

Most people expect a GUI interface to get into their desktop. But you dont have to use one if you dont want. SDDM can log into any desktops you have - KDE but also Gnome or XFCE etc. It can also help select X11 vs Wayland sessions.

There are alternatives like LightDM if you dont like SDDM. Or TTY is fine too. But generally they’re not large pieces of software and while they are undoubtedly bloated from what they could be, they are still small and lightweight in the era of Tbs of storage and Gb of memory. The savings you’d get in not using them would be small on the scale of the rest of the OS. Obviously they’re useless for none GUI machines / servers.

They’re called display managers because historically the concept was added to X11 system where you’d have a stand alone X terminal running locally for the end user with an X server which would then connect to an X display manager on a central machine. This was in the Unix days and shared spaces like governments, universities or corporations and the set up was potentially less hardware intensive allowing cheaper X terminals and an expensive central server.

The concept has gone now - PCs are vastly more poweful and can easily run the entire OS locally, and thin clients are the modern set up if you do want terminals/clients and central servers. The most common scenario is now the display manager running on your local PC, alongside everything else and essentially replicates the TTY login in a GUI form. So yes its basically a session manager but the name is historical and probably won’t be going anywhere fast.

I wonder why Apache continues to support OpenOffice. Its barely moved since 2014 and hasn’t even had a security update since 2023. They could archive it as an active project (keep the code available for those who want it) and redirect most users who land on the OpenOffice site to LibreOffice.

I’m not sure this true - PDF is an open standard. The issue isn’t generally with layout and reproducibility - a good PDF maker and a good reader will give you an accurate representation of how it looks on all devices once the PDF is created.

Certainly there isn’t a dedicated FOSS tool for make PDFs; Libre Office and Inkscape do a decent job but not perfect which may be what you’re referring to. And they’re not dedicated PDF makers plus the real problem is building fillable forms and signature tools.

But there is a proprietary alternative called Master PDF that is a dedicated and supports all the PDF standard features I believe; one perpetual license is $80 compared to Adobe subscription based charging. I’m not aware of other options myself but they may exist. But it’s a viable alternative to the “adobe tax”.

Also of course if you have Office 365 from Microsoft, you can use Word to export docs to PDF reliably (in my experience). Obviously as far as you can get from FOSS, but it is an option on Linux via web browser if you have it from work for example; at least you don’t have to pay Adobe but it’s scraping the bottom of the barrel for this threat I know!

Firefox can do basic annotating, adding text and adding pictures but it can’t make a new PDF from scratch.

You may be confusing Adobe Acrobat Reader with Adobe Acrobat? Full Acrobat is the proprietary tool to make a PDF file from scratch including some of the more complex functions.

PDF is an open standard and has been for a while, so there are now plenty of alternatives for most of the functions. LibreOffice Draw and Inkscape can do a lot of PDF creation functions but not all. There are also “print to PDF” options to create basic PDF documents too.

However some of the more niche functions are not widely supported or well supported; and there isn’t really any opensource dedicated PDF maker that I’m aware of. Layout tools are abundant but I think it’s things like building forms and document signing that is less easily replicated. There is Master PDF - a fully functional PDF maker which is proprietary and available for Linux; it $80 for a perpetual license. I’m not aware of any other alternatives myself.

The guy is ranting about a criminal investigation into why his polling numbers are so low. He’s quite literally a demented old man. I think he really isn’t rational enough to see that that he is harming the man he wants to win.

Second for The Rest is History. Its on all major podcast platforms and on YouTube. It has two hosts who take it in turns to talk about a topic while the other asks questions. Its full of gentle banter, and light humour but deleves in depth into topics. Some topics are covered in a single episode, others in depth in multi part series.

Its got a huge backlog of episodes, clearly labeled by topic and covers the full breadth of history. The two hosts are British but it covers global history, and it doesnt have biases. It does a “warts and all” approach to any topic.

Strongly recommend it.

The removal of the black gradient at the bottom is a plus.

Putting the controls in their own grey capsules so they still standout is a plus.

The moving of the volume button to the right is a negative.

I dont like change just for changes sake, but in fairness some of this is a good idea and a welcome design shift. I just hopebthey move the volume button back as having on the left with the main controls is pretty widespread and common design.

Debian has a good page on it and how their set up works:

https://wiki.debian.org/SecureBoot

Edit: Ubuntu is derived from Debian and then Mint from Ubuntu, but they may have their own differing approachsnto secure boot.

If your linux OS supports secure boot then it does help improve security.

The differing opinions on it are often because it can cause issues in some set ups and in a default set up its only a marginal security gain.

It will add a layer of security at boot by preventing 3rd party unauthenticated processes / software from running and creates a secure boot chain from your BIOS up to the OS. But the default set up also means other authenticated OSes like Windows can be run, so its not as secure as it could be.

To really secure it you could create your own keys and then only your OS could boot. But as a linux newbie thats likely way more than you need and there are risks if you fuck up, to the point of accidentally locking you out of your own machine

So your choice is really just the default set up being on or off. On is a bit more secure but if you experience any issues then turn it off and don’t worry about it.

Its not doing nothing. Linux uses a Microsoft provided key for initial BIOS authentication and then has its own tree of keys that it uses for security. So it does have the benefits of locking out malicious code/processes even in a default set up.

Using your own secure boot and TPM keys is certainly more secure, but it doesnt follow that secure boot with the default set up is doing nothing to help secure your system at boot.

Linux supports secure boot so if a distro supports it it’s worth using it.

Linux can use a key signed by Microsoft in a preboot loader and then itself perform its own key authentications for all other processes and software (a shim), forming a secure chain from the BIOS up during boot. You dont have to play with creating your own keys.

So if your OS supports secure boot it is worth using it for added security at boot. Its far from perfect in this set up (as there are plenty of windows OS that also have permission to boot) but it is better than a free for all without it even if the risk is low for most desktop users.

You can go further and generate your own keys and use secure boot and TPM together to lock down the system further but you dont have to to get some benefits from secure boot.