You mean with an actual plan?

“Agile development” (aka business substituted a plan with utter chaos and daily changing super-urgend demands) has ruined our industry.

Agile done right can be helpful, but in 95% of times, agile isn’t done right.

Electrical engineering can’t quite work like that because if you want to try out a change you have to order new, expensive prototype boards that take time to be finished and delivered. Can’t just run a new pipeline and have the new version in production within minutes.

Does gtfo() then work as expected?

They meant that you’d get the same message no matter what unrecognized option you use. So it’s not like they added a specific check that if you type in -h they will give you the message, but instead you get the same message for any unrecognized option.

The thing in the OP only occurs if you type exit, so they specifically added that message to be shown when the interpreter clearly knows what you want, but you just didn’t say it exactly right.

http://www.stilldrinking.org/programming-sucks

Especially that + and - act differently. If + does string concattenation, - should also do some string action or throw an error in this situation.

It’s not the client, it’s markup.

Nice, a relevant xkcd that I didn’t guess before clicking the link! Well done!

Have you tried JDownloader?

I’m perplexed.

Are they going to keep replacing whatever software they use?

That’s the stupid SO concept that questions can only be asked once. It makes sure that only the question from 2012 with all its outdated answers is available while everyone who asks for an update will get their question closed.

That’s why SO was great in 2012 but its rules made sure it got outdated fast.

SO used to be good, but they have this problem right down in their core concept that makes sure the content gets outdated fast.

And that’s the concept that every question can only be asked once.

That makes sure that everything gets outdated as soon as possible.

• Q: Can X be done in framework Y? (asked in 2012)
• A: No.

Now it’s 13 years later, and framework Y can do X since 5 years, but you can’t ask again, because your question will get closed as a duplicate to the outdated one from 2012. And since every time someone asked this question again in the last 13 years the question just got closed, google will just link you back to the question from 2012 claiming that framework Y can’t do X.

Who knew that a training in carpet salesmanship helps for a job as a prompt engineer.

Because Youtube autotranslates these stupid titles. I hate that, since it makes it really hard to know whether you are going to understand the video before clicking it.

I so wish that was the case.

Half the games I tried on Heroic don’t run and most of them run at <5 FPS even though I own a 4070 and the games I try to run are e.g. Bioshock. Number 1. The original, non-remastered one.

And stuff like Dawn of War crashes once I start the game, same as Bioshock 2, Neverwinter Nights and quite a few other older titles.

And even games that generally work fine (like Shadow of Mordor) sometimes randomly decide to run at 2 FPS.

If anyone has advice about what could cause that, I’d be grateful.

I’m on Fedora 41, running newest proprietary Nvidia drivers.

Sounds like you can’t handle multiple facets of a topic at the same time.

Tbh, I haven’t done time, but that’s still me.

I upgraded from an old laptop to a 4070. I tried HDR and I don’t see a difference at all. I turned off all the lights, closed the blinds and turned the (hdr compatible, I checked) screen to max brightness. I don’t see a difference with HDR turned on or off.

Next I tried path tracing. I could see a difference, but honestly, not much at all. Not nearly enough to warrant reduced FPS and certainly not enough to turn down other graphics settings to keep the FPS.

To me, both are just buzzwords to get people to fork over more money.

Beware, things are not that easy with Linux. If you use Windows, you use Windows. There are different versions but they are just differently old versions of the same thing. Same company, same people, same stuff. So you can say things like “Windows shares your data with Microsoft”, because there’s only 1-2 current versions of Windows at a time.

Since Linux is so open, there are thousands of different distributions created by thousands of different companies or even hobbyists doing that on their own time. And since it’s so open, it can be configured any which way.

For example, ChromeOS and Android are two Linux distributions created by Google, and both of them collect and share your data like crazy.

Some of the more classical Linux distributions (like e.g. Ubuntu) also ask you if you want to share data with them, but most of them allow you do decline and many of them really don’t share data at all (unless you run programs that do share data again).

So what you can say about data protection in regards to Linux is:

• It’s not Windows/Microsoft, which shares a lot
• Depending on the distro, it can share just as much as Windows, or nothing at all, or a configurable amount
• There are Linux distros that are very privacy focussed and share little to no data

But no, using any Linux doesn’t necessarily mean your data is protected in any special way.

Have you heard of Stallman’s new project TNL?

There’s pretty much three core OSes out there:

• Windows
• Linux
• BSD

Amost everything else is just a variation of these.

Android, ChromeOS, PS3 OS, tons of embedded systems like car entertainment systems, and of course all the traditional Linux distros like Ubuntu, Mint, PopOS, Fedora, and so on are Linux.

MacOS, iOS, Switch OS, pfSense and tons of embedded systems like routers, and of course all the traditional BSD distros like FreeBSD, NetBSD or OpenBSD and so on are BSD based. (Though Switch OS, to be fair, is mostly it’s own thing, only borrowing significant portions from BSD.)

Per se, it’s actually not. There are thousands and thousands of hobby-level kernels floating around. Many university courses actually include making your own simple kernel.

The big issue is that the kernel is the core of the whole ecosystem. Everything builds upon it. So if you build a new kernel, you pretty much need to rebuild everything built on top of it.

As a bad comparison, imagine you came up with a genious new shape for a car fuel hose nozzle. You know, the thing you plug into your car to refuel it. Designing a new nozzle is easy. Getting it made isn’t much harder either. Retrofitting billions of cars to work with that new shape is an almost impossible amount of work. So while making a new nozzle is no problem at all, actually implementing it is almost impossible.

The same holds true for the kernel. Making “a kernel” isn’t a big issue. Getting it to work with all PCs with all their diverse hardware and software is close to impossible.

The Linux kernel and the drivers running in it easily have billions of work hours invested into it, and still it doesn’t work perfectly with every piece of hardware you might have in your PC.