If I cared one wit about either of them, I'd put money on VLC. If only because Star Citizen won't make it before the heat death of the universe.

One main reason I went back to Arch BTW is that there aren’t, contrary to the old self a declaration by Suse, that many software available for my use case, so I ended up with tons of ppa’s, sorry, Suse Vendors who relied on each others for libraries, and it eventually broke down my system when some stuff wasn’t available but was required, while some may be available from 4 different, private, repos.

This is the reason I abandoned both Fedora and openSUSE when I tried them. I like plenty about both of them but things are just simpler on Arch. Despite Arch having less software than most distributions, it tends to be the software I actually want or need to use. The few programs not present can be installed from the AUR. Writing new PKGBUILDs is simple and there is no bureaucracy.

Arch is a pain upfront but I've found it tends to save you time later on. It's not without its downsides, though; the primary one being that I'm the one responsible for managing everything and there are plenty of things I don't know.

That's also my preference, but very few games are free software. And most of the games I want to play are encumbered with DRM or cost ten times as much to get DRM-free. Of course, I buy them DRM-free because the DRM doesn't work with Wine, but if it worked with Cedega...well, I might re-evaluate.

The purpose of the GPL isn’t to force companies to pay up to get out of copy left.

That's why it was created, but in practice, many companies make money by selling exceptions. See Cal.com and CKEditor5, for instance. I didn't mention this at all in my comment, though, so I'm not quite sure which part you're responding to. By "level playing field", I meant that everyone can improve Sourcehut and sell a service with more features, but they need to release those new features under the same license, meaning they will make it back to Sourcehut proper. Selling exceptions isn't the only way to make money from free software.

I’m always worried about over explaining or sounding pendantic.

That makes two of us :)

I don't doubt it, but this is a good place to start.

This claim has interesting phrasing:

Adding X11 sandboxing via a nested X11 server, such as Xpra, would not be difficult, but Flatpak developers refuse to acknowledge this and continue to claim, "X11 is impossible to secure".

If you look at the GNOME post, you'll see they haven't argued against including a nested X server at all:

Now that the basics are working it’s time to start looking at how to create a real sandbox. This is going to require a lot of changes to the Linux stack. For instance, we have to use Wayland instead of X11, because X11 is impossible to secure.

I'm not saying they haven't refused to acknowledge this elsewhere, but it's strange to point to this blog post which acknowledges that the sandbox is very much a work-in-progress and agrees with Madaidan that X11 is hard to secure.

Does Xpra provide better sandboxing than XWayland? If not, I think the Flatpak developer's solution to this is: just use Wayland. And obviously, there's plenty of room to improve with the permissions Flatpak does offer.

I did some searching on the Flatpak Github for issues and found that you can actually use Xpra with Flatpak, and the answer is "just use Wayland":

• https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/3833
• https://github.com/flatpak/flatpak/issues/3684

This is also concerning:

As odd as this may sound, you should not enable (blind) unattended updates of Flatpak packages. If you or a Flatpak frontend (app store) simply executes flatpak update -y, Flatpaks will be automatically granted any new permissions declared upstream without notifying you. Using automatic update with GNOME Software is fine, as it does not automatically update Flatpaks with permission changes and notifies the user instead.

Source: https://privsec.dev/posts/linux/desktop-linux-hardening/#flatpak

It's great that GNOME Software notifies you when permissions change! I don't use Flatpak enough to know, but I hope flatpak update notifies you too if you don't use the -y option.

I use both GNOME and KDE. I do have a system tray, but it's for a single program: fcitx-mozc. If I didn't need to build ibus-mozc from source, I would just use that. iBus IMEs get their own spot in the top right without needing appindicators. That being said, I don't need the system tray either as I can just switch between Japanese and English with CTRL+SPACE. But it's nice to have some kind of constant indication what IME I'm using.

On the subject of a dock, though, I love the way GNOME completely separates it from the workspace. It just takes up space and I don't have any utility for it. Windows and macOS only allow you to hide the dock; not remove it completely. I've accidentally opened the dock by moving my cursor to the corner of the screen way too many times and it is sooo annoying. This never happens on GNOME because it's just not possible.

Also I tend to think it’s been designed for people who are more comfortable using a keyboard. I’m mostly a mouse person.

That's absolutely true, but you can navigate GNOME completely with a mouse. If you're on a laptop, you can use the trackpad to flick between workspaces with three fingers. Every aspect of the GNOME desktop is navigable with the mouse, including the Activity Overview. GNOME's workflow changed the way I use computers.

One thing I miss from KDE is GNOME's tiling. KDE's is far more inconsistent. But there are a lot of things I like more about KDE too. I use it in basically the same way as GNOME.

It doesn't really mean anything on its own. It's romanized as "Shi". If you know your Japanese, you'll know "Shi" is how you pronounce 死; or "Death". The word is not usually written in Katakana, though. There's also ツ, which is romanized as "Tsu".

Every Dell laptop I've ever owned has had a key repeat issue. Mind you, this was an issue on Windows too. Otherwise, I bought a Dell Latitude last year and it has worked great.

I should have specified that the Audacity CLA allowed Muse Group to relicense Audacity from GPLv2 to GPLv3. Yes, I agree with you that not all CLAs are bad. While you keep the copyright to all your contributions, because the copyright is assigned to them (? I'm not actually sure about this), they can relicense it. The CLA agreement.

You grant MUSECY SM LTD, an affiliate of MuseScore and Ultimate Guitar, (“Company”) the ability to use the Contributions in any way. You hereby grant to Company , a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works.

There was quite a lot of confusion and outrage about this at the time, so I can't recall whether Muse Group specifically said they wanted to include Audacity in Apple's app store or this was given as an example of why the CLA could be beneficial. My rebuttal was this is not a particularly noble cause. There was also the argument that the FSF requires you to sign a CLA for its own projects so it can reserve the right to relicense it if it benefits the project. My rebuttal to this was...well, it's the FSF. The day the FSF relicenses their software under a non-free license is the day they die.

All in all, I'm not worried yet.

It seems like this issue is finally, actually fixed with the new driver release.

I haven't had a chance to try it out but the responses on the thread look promising.

Edit: Ah, I see you've already gotten the news. Well, good to hear.

I would be interested in seeing Mozilla invest in making Mojeek better. I think they could be a good match. An independent browser engine and an independent search engine. On the other hand, I don't want Mozilla to acquire them and kill them a few years later. Their short attention span is one quality I wish they hadn't cribbed from Google.

A search engine is an interesting idea, but:

1. it needs to be independent. Mozilla can't be depending on Google or Bing. After Bing got what they wanted, they started choking their proxies by pushing prices up substantially. Depending on Google is a similar folly.
2. they need to be committed to it. This isn't some project Mozilla can cook up in three or four years and abandon two years later. It needs to be a long-term strategy with hundreds of millions of dollars invested.

That's why I think Mojeek could be a shortcut. But either way, I don't think Mozilla has the bandwidth (or guts, frankly) to commit to this sort of project.

But you are right, they are still depending on the monster that is Google.

And as long as you're depending on them, you might as well take as much as you can.

However, there are independent engines out there. The first one that pops to mind is Gigablast, which does it’s own indexing/crawling.

Gigablast went down 2 months ago. The crawler is available as free software, though.

Mojeek's Search Engine Map gives you a good picture of the search engines out there. You can also see Seirdy's very informative post on all the different search engines out there, which is fairly regularly updated: https://seirdy.one/posts/2021/03/10/search-engines-with-own-indexes/