Doesn't the publisher of the game have to approve for a game to be put on GeForce Now?

I mean, don't get me wrong - I know anti cheat detection has never been perfect, but you'd think this would be something they heavily try to make sure they get right.

I posted about this on the KDE community a couple of weeks ago, but Dolphin (their file manager) has a nice trick for archives (zips, tar's, etc) - in the extract menu, there's an "Extract, Autodetect Subfolder" button which will:

• If the archive has an inner subfolder (and just that), it will extract this as expected
• If the archive doesn't have an inner subfolder, and all the files are at the root level, it will create a new folder for you and extract the files there

This way, you don't end up with files splattered all over say, your downloads folder. Easily one of my favorite features, and is something I wish every File Manager had. It feels like someone had the same pain that I do (and I'm sure plenty others) of extracting something, and regretting it - but then they went as far as to fix the problem for everyone and implemented a feature for it (I'd love to have the knowledge to contribute to KDE someday)!

I tried out the beta version of 545 last week, I swear it made the render issue with XWayland apps worse. Even if it's back to the 535 state, it still makes using Wayland on Nvidia very difficult unless every application you plan to use is Wayland native. It'll be a while before that's the case for me.

I plan to just pick up a 6700 XT next week. I'm tired of being a second class citizen in Nvidia's eyes.

That being said, I appreciate the devs themselves who've been working on improving what they can (there's a couple that I've even seen participating in the Freedesktop GitLab). I assume the lackluster Linux support comes from the management side of things. I may not like the company, but I obviously don't have disdain for every single person there.

Websites that do not let me copy/paste my password in from my password manager, and break the auto-fill functionality.

Additionally, the ones that make you change the password every sixty days because they don't let me copy and paste the newly generated one in... It just feels like they're begging me to try to use an insecure one.

This feels like a bit of a sideways take. I'll preface this with that I love Linux, and its been my preferred operating system for years.

That being said, "helplessness" isn't Microsoft's fault. Most people do not want to know the ins-and-outs of how something works, and that's perfectly okay. I am a software developer, but despite the fact that I have an Android (Pixel) phone I generally do not care to root my phone, flash alternative ROMs, etc anymore. I use Linux on my PC, but I do not want to spend hours tinkering with my phone, only for it to most likely end up in a state that is less-than-par than what it came with. I am glad that Android is open enough (well, its not as cut-and-dry as that but its more open than iOS) for the people who do want to tinker around with it to be able to do so, but its not for me. If I'm out and trying to request an Uber, I don't want my phone to crash every time I open the app just because the ROM I'm using has a bug.

By the same token, there are times where I don't really want to mess around with going through a million settings on my PC when I just need it to allow me to do some work. That is a trade-off that you tend to make with Linux (though its certainly gotten a lot better over the years), and I can't fault people for not wanting to go through that. Sometimes, I wish I hadn't made that trade-off and had just stayed blind to the love/hate relationship I've come to form around Linux.

I do not want to tinker around with my keyboard, I just want it to allow me to type. I don't want to tinker around with my headphones, I just want to listen to music. I use my refrigerator every day, and while I have some rudimentary understanding of how it works, I really rather not tinker around with it - and if it stops working, you're not likely to find me trying to fix it myself (short of say, the light bulb going out).

A coworker of mine convinced another coworker to wipe their system and install Fedora, and use the Looking Glass + VFIO passthrough trick to have a Windows VM within Linux like he does. He spent both of his days off trying to get it to work (and facing weird issues that even I couldn't explain and find a solution for), and at the end of today he decided to reinstall Windows so that tomorrow he can have something reliable to use for work. This is exactly why I usually don't push people to use Linux. If they want to know more about it, sure I'm happy to show them the ropes - but selling it as a perfect solution is a bad idea and only makes Linux look bad.

If Microsoft didn't make an operating system that was simple enough for users who just want things to work, yet powerful enough for those who want to do more with it (such as making games, or using CAD software for engineering) then someone else would. I definitely get frustrated with Windows, but at the end of the day, it is what most of the world uses for a reason (just like Linux is used for most web servers around the world for a reason) - its the right tool for their job, whatever that job might be. Sure, the vague error codes that you get from Windows is frustrating at times, but Windows isn't open source and that is not likely to change. How is the old XP error code format of STOP CODE 0X003ABF VIOLATION OCCURRED AT KERNEL.DLL (along with the rest of the useless stack trace) going to help you anymore than the shorter ones that are generally found on Windows nowadays? You can't exactly go submit a pull request to fix the issue. In terms of the ability to search for the error, I've very rarely ever seen a Windows error code that didn't have a million and one causes (and ^2 the amount of potential "solutions" for the supposed cause). It's certainly not going someone whose just trying to do their homework for school, or edit their resume for job applications.

The same thing applies to the whole iOS vs Android debate. The same coworker who sold Linux to my other coworker uses an iPhone (actually, they both do as far as I'm aware), because its been reliable for him. He doesn't need to have the source code to iOS in order for it to do what he needs it to do. Quite frankly, the whole "sheeple" thing that you tend to hear people say, and this "Windows users are zombies" take being portrayed in this comment is incredibly childish. If you're not sharing the computer, the phone, etc and someone else owns it - why does it matter what they use?

I suppose you could argue that the majority of people these days don't want to troubleshoot anything, but can you really blame them? Imagine yourself before anything that you learnt about Linux, Windows, and computers in general - with the way things are built (think laptops and phones, with how their components tend to be soldered in) doing anything yourself to repair stuff is very difficult, and has a high chance of leaving you with a brick (which isn't a Microsoft invention). How many people have you seen try to fix a software related issue on their PC or phone, and ended up making the issue worse (which can be done just as easily, if not easier, on Linux)? Those stories are why a lot of people do not want to try to fix something and reach out to support, take it in for repair, replace it, etc.

In your settings, you can set your preferred languages - since you're on lemmy.world this link should take you there. You can hold control down to select multiple options if you're on desktop (and mobile should have a selection box pop up).

Though be sure to keep "undetermined" enabled, otherwise a lot of stuff will vanish. Also note that this only works for posts/comments where people have actually selected the correct language (if someone posts something in German, but marks it as English for example, it will still pop up).

They do! There are donation options listed at the bottom of the Join Lemmy website.

LOL

We removed it way before the pricing change was announced because the views were so low, not because we didn't want people to see it.

(emphasis theirs)

I don't believe that in the slightest. While yes, they did do that quite a while before the change took place, it was hosted there as an easy way to track changes to the ToS. I bet it was more of a "Any changes we make will stand out a lot more", not realizing that any big change they make was going to stand out regardless (this whole thing being an example).

I mean come on, they could've at least tried with a better lie. I would've gone "Eh, maybe" if they'd said something like "Our legal team suggested that we keep it hosted in a central location, on our website". But really, "not enough people looked at it"?? What a joke.

I don't generally go with the "Oh no, anyways..." comment, but that's truly how I feel about the whole Reddit drama at this point.

They made their bed, and now they have to lie in it. I have zero confidence they'll change, and even on the remote chance they wanted to, its pretty much too late for that.

The Bitwarden clients all keep a cached copy of your password database, which can be viewed even if your server goes offline (you just can't make edits) - you can even export it when that is the case.

However, if you log out of Bitwarden, it erases the local cache off that device, which will require your server to be online in order to retrieve again (or export it from a different device that is still signed in).

This is such a ridiculous position.

I'm not the original person you responded to, but I am going to go out on a limb here and say that I disagree. While I personally do not think that all Chromium browsers (especially since there are projects like ungoogled-chromium) transmit your personal data, I can't verify this myself because the Chromium codebase is far too much of an undertaking for myself to review.

While the same is also true for Firefox (and really any potential open source browser), on a pure personal-trust factor I trust Mozilla/Firefox to be more caring about protecting my personal data than I do Google, who literally revolves around data collection. Inevitably its a moot point for me since I do use Google services anyways, but I don't think its that far reaching for someone who potentially doesn't to take the original person's stance.

So, I was born in the late 90's - I don't know if they still have "computer literacy" as a core course in schools these days, but they did when I was going through K-12 (or, well K-9.. once you were in high school they assumed you knew the basics of how to use a computer, and had more advance courses).

One of the very first things we learned about the internet is that once you put something on the internet, there is no way to take it back. At the time, uploading pictures to the "cloud" and such wasn't really a thing so we learnt this by using email: Once you've sent an email to someone, you cannot "unsend" it. You can kindly ask the other party to delete the copy of the email without opening it, but you cannot guarantee that the email wasn't saved on another computer, or saved somewhere else along the route between your computer and the receiver's computer. Clicking the send button was taught to us as "etching your letter into stone".

Because of this, I've always (or at least, as far as I can remember) made sure that anything I put on the internet, or even "put into digital form" (such as even writing something in a file on your computer - you can recover deleted files from a hard drive unless you really put in the effort to actually erase it... there is a huge difference between erasing a file, and marking it as "deleted") is something that I'm okay being tied with me forever. I'm sure if you looked hard enough, you could find me participating on message boards as a young teenager - and to that I just say "Oh well". Is some of it probably very cringe-inducing and embarrassing? I have no doubt.

(This is also why you should take extreme caution when talking about say, your friend, on the internet - if you post something about them on the internet, you're condemning them to this same exact thing)

Now funnily enough, as far as I understand the ActivityPub protocol, it is for all intents and purposes the exact same as email in this regard. Once you've sent something, there are no "take backs". All you can do is kindly ask others to delete their copy, and that comes with zero guarantees. If I had a mastodon server, and someone deletes their toot - I could take down my server and my server would never receive that delete request. Or, just simply change the source code of the Mastodon instance on my server to straight up ignore deletion requests.

Would it be nice for Lemmy to have a way to actually delete your content? Sure. But that's not technically feasible, and personally (as controversial as it may seem) I would rather Lemmy not try to give you the false sense that everything was completely gone forever. I'm not saying that you shouldn't be able to delete your account off a Lemmy instance, but it shouldn't come with an option that says "Check here to remove your data/media from all federated instances" because Lemmy/no one can promise that, and I really hate it when software (or really anyone/anything) attempts to make a promise in bad-faith knowing that they can't possibly ever uphold it.

Anyone who thinks Reddit is "better" than Lemmy in this regard probably doesn't realize that Reddit is making a claim they can't keep. The most obvious example of this is all of these subreddits that have gone dark? You can bring up most of their posts on the Wayback Machine or Google Cache. That would be the case regardless of whether they were set to private, or even if they were just straight up "deleted".

We really should not be setting the belief for people that there exists a way to completely nuke a piece of data off the internet, because you cannot make a guarantee of that being the case.