Does it run on GNU+UWU ?

Without the service what can you use the hardware for? Play the games you already downloaded?

Didn’t we have competive games before matchmaking existed? People used forums… (and met up in person, or something). Don’t route matchmaking to us then but know that we ought to have the option to host it ourselves anyway.

Tarkov was working on Linux and then they added anticheat. Comments were made, iir it would be enabled in the future, but it’s still blocked today.

I’ve seen “we’re working on proton emulation” turn up empty before. Without knowing what they are actully working on I do not see any meat on the bone.

What exactly are they working on?

Invert the gravity value and then all the dice will be floating point 🫣

Are you implying “exempt from the service” means Linux gets blocked?

“Please stop fighting this distopian law”.

Maybe the tech industry mostly sucks? Most programmers will write anything for the right cost, regardless of how evil a company overtly acts? I hope I’m just being cynical but I assume most think “if I don’t work for this company someone else will”.

I would have looked into generating AI art if it required the same license as the training art.

Training data is frequently copied and used regardless of license. It appears the outputs of machine generated art not “human creativity”, thus not eligible for copyright.

😬

What’s the reason?

When do you see Linux using more resources?

Just watched a rescent video comparing Mint and Windows loading some games and it looked like Linux was always lower as Windows starts the race allocating more.

The topic of mantaining code around AI PRs has it’s place but I ain’t feeling it after that declaration to disregard far more significant problems around AI (““it’s a tool””). I ain’t in the mood for silly word games about compilers.

Work for free before getting paid! There will still be ads on your videos, but they ain’t sharing the attention money.

If you know where I could read about the monetary issues of xz and heartbeat I would appreciate such links.

You could be right about their ill motives for what they said but we do not know if they can even afford to pay or know enough to contribute. You could say my motives for software freedom are selfishly motivated, and I’ve only donated an OS. Given the numerous libre projects in our OS it’s difficult for anyone to do them all?

It makes sense that it’s more difficult to earn money from software when you attach a software freedom license - you’re actively choosing to not take advantage of your users. Like choosing not to just dump mercury in the river when it’s legal.

I enjoy writing code so not having the bad incentives from trying to monetize it seems a blessing - I don’t feel compelled to deny user software freedom for profit. I think focus may be better placed on promoting a univeral basic income - where everyone’s income doesn’t start at 0. That would help devs choose to keep their projects open.

You say most, so some have figured it out then?

I think a universal basic income would make it a lot easier for devs to choose to continue/start making free (libre) software. Depending on the country, a UBI funded by tech companies - including those corpos using it without giving back.

If so then I reject the implication that you cannot get meaningfully paid without making an open source project closed source.

Without looking at the history all I can say your interpratation is possible. However, I reject the idea it’s ““professional”” to close source a once open source project. I can certainly understand a simple project becoming untenable due to popularity and sympathize the need to make money but failing to respect user’s software freedom points closer to their suggested motives.