Seconded. Having an awesome Fish setup doesn’t help at all when you’re constantly having to shell into other machines unless you somehow keep your dotfiles synced, and that sounds like a total hassle.

I’d rather my muscle memory be optimized for the standard setup.

Wanting to and actually doing it are two different things.

The problem is that open source devs also have to be their own project managers, but those two jobs have very different skillsets.

In regular software development, it’s the PM’s job to deal with the drama, filter the idiocy out and collect concise and actionable user stories, and let the developers just write code.

In open source, you tend to deal with a lot of entitlement. All kinds of people, who never gave you a dime, come out out of the woodwork to yell at you over every little change. The bigger and farther reaching a project is, the more this happens, and it wears you down. I can only imagine what it’s like working on a huge project like GNOME.

And the toxicity feeds into itself. Be kurt with one person, and suddenly it gets out that you’re an asshole to users. Then people come in expecting hostility and react defensively to every little comment. And that puts you in the same mindset.

At the end of the day, you can’t satisfy everyone. Sometimes you gotta figure out how to tell someone their feature request is stupid and you’re not gonna work on it, especially not for free. And a lot of people need to learn to try to fix problems themselves before opening an issue. That’s kind of the whole point of open source.

https://lemmy.zip/comment/11156711

It doesn’t excuse the behavior, but I get where it’s coming from.

At this point, no. But it’s still incredibly annoying and a little spooky when I’m laying in bed and I see my computer screen light up in the next room when it’s not supposed to.

It’ll even wake itself from sleep when it wants to update, but it won’t start it automatically, I think because it hits the lock screen.

I’ll probably try Linux on ir when Windows 10 hits EOL.

Someone should force this guy to read about the principle of least astonishment.

Doesn’t surprise me that a developer from Microsoft doesn’t understand this. To this day, when I select “Update and Shut Down” in Windows, it only actually shuts the computer down about half the time.

This only happens when both network connection on the host are active.

I’m not a networking expert by any means but this seems like a pretty strong hint that it’s a routing issue.

Check the routing tables on the host? I’d bet that the internet is only reachable on the LAN interface (again, not an expert but one of them has to take priority, right?). I’m guessing that disconnecting the LAN interface changes the routing to go through the WLAN interface instead.

You could possibly add a static route to work around this: https://libvirt.org/formatnetwork.html#static-routes

Nice to see that Mastodon has the same problem as Twitter with people trying to use it for long-form blog posts for some godforsaken reason.

I’ve long believed that the main point of client-side anti-cheat is to serve as security theater.

If the player sees “PROTECTED BY ACME ANTI-CHEAT” on the boot screen of a game, they’re less likely to cry wolf when they get their ass kicked. At least, until they see a blatant example of hacking and lose all faith in the ability of the platform to protect them from it; from that point on, everyone better than them must be cheating from their perspective (speaking from firsthand experience here).

Given how infamously toxic and high-strung the LoL community is, I can only imagine that Riot’s basically at the end of their rope here. If you read the original forum post, they sure make this sound like a Hail Mary. “Sorry, it’s just what we have to do to make sure the game is fair.”

Hilariously, they even undercut their own points in the FAQ:

Q: If Vanguard is so good, why do I still see cheats on VALORANT?

For starters, we do not action every cheat or account instantly. Every ban is like broadcasting a signal to the developer that their cheat has been detected and that they need to “update” it. In order to slow the progression of our “cheat arms race,” we delay bans based on the sophistication and visibility of the cheat and cheater, respectively.

But also, cheaters gonna cheat. [Emphasis mine.] We’ve really driven our preventative layer as far as we can feasibly go without colliding with existing setups and hurting legitimate players. [Linux players aren’t legitimate I guess?]

Also, they’re apparently not bothering enabling Vanguard on OS X because apparently few people have actually developed cheats on it yet. Really tells you what’s the more developer friendly platform, Linux or OS X, doesn’t it? Or maybe the OS X market share is too small to care.

They do also mention using machine learning to detect cheating server-side but lament that it’s not always enough information, and that cheat developers have added “humanization” elements that play more like humans.

My thought is… if a cheat doesn’t make someone obviously better than a human player of a certain skill level, then what does it really matter? Congratulations, you made a bot that’s indistinguishable from a human, thanks for padding our player numbers.

The real problem is that botters don’t pay for microtransactions. And players who buy bot-leveled accounts probably don’t spend a ton either. Why would they? They got everything unlocked for them, they didn’t have to grind for it. That’s all Riot really gives a shit about.

lol yep, S9.

In the five years of owning this phone, I have never once pressed that button on purpose. I press it on accident at least once a week.

Hey, ping matters when you’re trying to buy a domain before someone snipes it from you