It's always inspiring to see random people on Lemmy calling out big-FOSS and sticking up for the little guy.

(Mandatory /s in case people don't know that FUTO's founder is literally a tech billionaire)

VS Codium uses open vsx, which is the extension registry built and run by the Eclipse team. Whatever extensions you're using will also work on Theia.

That's just AI marketing bandwagon crap, probably fishing for funding. The editor has been around for a few years, and it had nothing to do with AI until very recently.

A BBC journalist ran the image through an AI chatbot which identified key spots that may have been manipulated.

This is terrifying. Does the BBC not have anyone on the team that understands why this does not, and will never work?

I don't like this. Flatpaks are a huge step forward, but Fedora Flatpaks are two steps back. I'm not at all convinced by his arguments here or in the rejected proposal.

The only potential benefit that might make sense is that they will contain the same Fedora-specific patches found in the fedora RPMs... Except that is exactly the type of thing Flatpaks were supposed to prevent! Neither users nor developers want a middle man adding or removing features for their software. It has historically been one of the biggest pain points for migrating to Linux as a user, or supporting it as a developer. It was necessary in the past for compatibility reasons, but Flatpaks fixed that. Now, developers can publish one Flatpak that will work on all distros, and users don't have to wonder if they'll be able to use some app or not, or whether it will work... Unless they're on Fedora

But I don't like this post nor the wording in the proposal. He doesn't actually outline why he wants this to go through. I'm not claiming any tinfoil hat conspiracy behind the scenes, it's just his argument is not well articulated. If someone wants to use an app with Fedora-specific patches for some reason, they can layer the RPM on top of their Atomic distro. There's no reason to add uncertainty and confuse users by turning those into flatpaks.

It's just a weird coincidence that so many major tech CEOs are Indians. It's business as usual that tech CEOs are far right, regardless of race.

What on earth did you run on a DS and windows? I’m curious!

A homebrew game, of course! Well, more like a game engine demo. Making game engines is more fun than making games.

I'm not sure why you find it so hard to believe, as it's pretty straight-forward to build a game on top of APIs like

void DrawRectangle(...);
void DrawSprite(...);

Then implement them differently on each target platform.

BTW we used hard coded in memory structures, not serialising stuff, you’d have a hard time doing that perfectly well on the DS IMO.

You mean embedded binary data? That's still serialization, except you're using the compiler as your serializer. Modern serialization frameworks usually have a DSL that mimics C struct declarations, and it's not a coincidence. Look up any zero-copy serialization tool and you'll find that they're all basically trying to accomplish the same thing: load a binary blob directly into a native C struct, but do it portably (which embedded binary data is not)

As for understanding your data, you need to know the size of the int on your system to set up the infamous INT32 to begin with!

Nah, that's what int32_t is for. The people who built the toolchain did that for me.

Have you never heard of the concept of serialization? It's weird for you to bring up the Nintendo DS and not be familiar with that, as it's a very important topic in game development. Outside of game development, it's used a lot in network code. Even javascript has ArrayBuffer.

Well cite me one then

I've personally built small homebrew projects that run on both Nintendo DS and Windows/Linux. Is that really so hard to imagine? As long as you design proper abstractions, it's pretty straightforward.

Generally speaking, the best way to write optimal code is to understand your data first. You can't do that if you don't even know what format your data is in!

What's "complicated stuff"? Your business logic will probably be complicated regardless of what you use. A framework will just add a few more layers of complexity and introduce a (usually fragile) build process.

Idk what you're trying to build, but from this:

I “just” want to build a pretty standard, responsive, modern-looking UI. Ideally without too much boilerplate,

It doesn't sound like you need a framework. Want responsive? Learn how to use flexbox. Want a "modern" look? Learn design, or find some CSS templates to start from.

If you're trying to make a SPA (which a lot of beginners/insane people seem to think is a good default, which it definitely is not), then a framework might make it easier, or it might not. It depends on what you're building. You may be able to use HTMX with a light sprinkling of JavaScript, or may need a full-blown batteries-included framework.

So. What are you building?

A rust rewrite of these tools has a lot of potential commercial value, and I can totally see a cloud provider like AWS putting this into some "hardened cloud AI distro" or whatever. They'll be able to do exactly what they did to Elastic Search, or do the EEE thing and add bugfixes/features that they don't contribute back in order to make their offering more competitive, make minor changes to the CLI as a lock-in strategy, etc.

Not licensing this as GPL will inevitably lead to the erosion of freedoms for everyone.

Wtf is clash verge? Just use wireguard directly. Set it up in the KDE network manager app and it'll automatically apply to all software on the system

Here's a good article with some context around the F-droid situation, and why Signal is full of crap.

I think it’s also important to understand that signal is also a company that, at some ooint, needs to make money from somewhere to do this awesome thing and they won’t get that limiting themselves to an obscure app store that maybe 1 in 100 users even know about.

Signal is a non-profit and backed by a billionare. Tbh idk what their financials look like, but they don't seem to be in a difficult funding situation at all.

I also highly doubt that Google would modify the signal binary with a backdoor...

They definitely wouldn't do it for everyone, but if the FBI comes knocking at their door and tells them that they need to access a specific person's Signal chats, deploying a backdoored update to that individual is easily within Google's power. It's extremely likely nobody would notice, unless maybe the target is a security researcher or something. And IMO even if the info does come out, most of the blame/consequences (if any) would fall on the government, not Google.

Considering everyone is being labeled a "terrorist" nowadays by this whackjob administration, this type of scenario seems increasingly likely to me.