I am still hoping it will hit 10% market share within my life time.

Do we really want that?

We have it pretty good right now. I would actually say we’re living in a golden age of desktop Linux: there’s constant innovation, good support, you get to do pretty much everything you need, while flying under the radar.

Linux has won the majority of the industry (servers, mobile etc.) so it’s not like it has anything left to prove.

If it starts getting noticeable on the desktop I fear we’re just gonna get negative attention. Users who take and not contribute, because Windows had taught them to be entitled. Unwanted attention from Microsoft, who I bet are not going to be doing nice things once they start getting paranoid about it.

I really don’t think that large companies like Adobe will care about Linux even at 10% and even if they did, they are a super toxic company nowadays, the least we get to interact with them the better.

Many people have a warped understanding of what “two factor” means.

They conflate it with devices and they think it means that one of the factors (why one? which one? who knows) needs to be restricted to exactly one device.

What “two factor” really means is that you should have more than one required factor of authentication so that if one is compromised the attackers still can’t get in.

Ideally the factors should be spread across the “something you know” / “something you own” / “something you are” categories to complicate the manner in which they can be compromised.

We can only reliably rememeber a limited amount of passwords, so like it or not we have to use some devices at least some of the time.

The trouble with “something you own” is that it can be lost or damaged or stolen, and if you only have one of it then you’re fucked. So adding some redundancy is not a bad idea.

The larger issue is that everybody is stuck into extremely rigid and outdated mindsets that date back decades. “Two factors” don’t have to be exactly two, and they don’t have to include exactly one password, and so on. It should be fine if you wanted to secure your account with 3 passwords, and should be up to you if one of those password is a barcode tattooed on your taint so you need a mirror and to bend upside down to scan it.

Bottom line, use whatever you want and use your best judgment as to how secure is each factor. If you want to use something that syncs to multiple devices, go ahead. What you should consider is who has access to those devices and how it would affect you if they’re lost or stolen.

You can get a small Bluetooth keyboard. They make them really tiny, for this exact use case (smartphones and tablets).

Since this is a Surface you can probably find one that’s been specifically designed to integrate with it (act as a cover).

glib2-devel is available in Manjaro.

glib2-devel is present on all Manjaro branches.

glib2-devel is a core package and pacman should be able to install it directly. Have you updated your package mirrors and upgraded the system since you installed the machine?

It’s not. Series X and series S use native Bluetooth and work with xpadneo. Older controllers use their own proprietary receiver that needs to be plugged into the machine and work with regular xpad.

Probably a better idea would be to leave it archived. Whoever wants to take over can fork it and prove themselves by showing their work.

The xz debacle has shown that there are risk involved in an established developer endorsing an unknown one.

It will go through Google servers if you want to talk to an Android user… If Apple implemented RCS only for its own users there wouldn’t be much point to it. 🙂

You just need an app that does this transparently.

Oh wait, that’s why Google isn’t letting anybody else use RCS. 😄

I’d be more interested to know what they think iMessage is, if not a messaging app…

I’m fairly sure the only reason for which Apple is using RCS is to circumvent the EU DSA, which requires them to make iMessage interoperable with other chat systems. So instead of opening access to iMessage they’re using a completely different system as a distraction.

I mean, they could’ve said that iMessage is already interoperable via SMS but the feature disparity is too large. RCS will serve nicely to confuse the issue.

There’s otherwise nothing to gain for Apple by adopting RCS. iMessage already does everything RCS does and more.

They could also kill RCS tomorrow if they wanted to, by simply releasing iMessage for Android. But then they wouldn’t have a red herring to show the EU — if anything they’d be in an even worse position as per DSA. It would also antagonize Google although I’m not sure how much they care about that.

Hence the controversy! 🙂

Also, Graphene tend to act superior about it and it pisses people off.

They claim their security measures are better then other custom ROMs.

Just a note, the US military completed the phase-out of floppy disks in 2019.

Bold of you to assume Ubuntu was a recent version.

Don’t worry, Ubuntu was probably Lucid. 🤭

Medical environments are notorious for inept tech skills and slow technology adoption.

If you were 100% specific you would be effectively writing the code yourself. But you don’t want that, so you’re not 100% specific, so it makes up the difference. The result will include an unspecified percentage of code that does not fit what you wanted.

It’s like code Yahtzee, you keep re-rolling this dice and that dice but never quite manage to get the exact combination you need.

There’s an old saying about computers, they don’t do what you want them to do, they do what you tell them to do. They can’t do what you don’t tell them to do.

Oh, God, he’s trying to use pointers again. He can never get them right. And they say I’m supposed to chase my tail…

SO gives you very specific, small examples. GenAI will happily generate entire projects, test suites etc. It’s much easier to get caught into the fantasy that the latter creates.