BananaTrifleViolin

I blame social media. We have moved from shared media and expertise presented to us (including it’s faults) to listening the loudest and most obnoxious voices in the echo chamber of your choice.

We really do need social media regulation; instead of them being dopamine engines to fuel advertising there needs to be some semblance of control and exposing people to more than their chosen echo chamber or preferred content. It’ll be difficult to do, but doing nothing is patently leading to the breakdown of our societies all just to line the pockets of American tech billionaires and shareholders.

All OSes are a collection of lots of different software that work together to run your system.

For Linux distros, that includes kernel packages (the core of the OS), but also a huge range of software to make the desktop work, apps you run (office software etc) and more. They are all separate projects, constantly working on and releasing updates at their own paces. There are new software releases all the time for all sorts of things.

If you install a Linux point release Distro, like Ubuntu 22.04, you get the OS and a snapshot of lots of different software they have chosen to package. Then after install you will receive constant minor patches and security updates, but the main software doesn’t get major updates. For example, if Ubuntu uses say version 1.0 of your desktop (e.g. Gnome), and the Gnome project then releases 2.0, you won’t receive that. You’ll just receive patches and security fixes for KDE 1.0, but not big updates for new features or changes. This allows Ubuntu to keep 22.04 stable and working predictably for people, and means they don’t have to retest the whole OS to make sure it works and stays secure. All they have to do is test the security patches, make sure those work well with the existing OS and then release that to users.

But overtime Ubuntu 22.04 inevitably falls further behind all the major releases of the software they use, and people are missing out on more and more new features, more major bug fixes and more. The desktop environment for example might have released version 2.0 with new features, and the Office software may have released 2.0 with new features, and 100s of other components the same even in just 6 months. So the distro maintainers then build a whole new version of the OS with all the big changes they want to include, and release that as 22.10 in October 2022 - this is their next 6 monthly point release. People can chose to stay on 22.04 and just get security patches (so the OS is stable and safe) or decide to move their PC to 22.10 and get the newer software.

This is a constant process. Ubuntu is on a 6 monthly release cycle, and people can chose when they want to switch; they can do it every 6 months or less frequently if they want. Ubuntu and other distros also have LTS releases - Long Term Service releases - if you use that version, it is maintained for a few years as is, except for patches and security updates. Not everyone wants the latest version of software, they may just want something that they know works and they get on with using it.

Another model is rolling releases where the Linux distro constantly rolls out new updates for all the components. This can even be weekly, or near enough daily; for example OpenSuSE Tumbleweed is a rolling release. People might not update every day but the maintainers are constantly rolling out the latest versions of software (after some testing to make sure it works) so that end users can keep bang up to date on near enough everything. This is riskier than a point-release, and sometimes bugs get through that have to be undone, but it allows those who want cutting edge systems to have them. OpenSuSE also have a point release version Leap which updates once a year, and is also developing Slowroll which works on a monthly release cycle.

Windows actually does something very similar to the “Point Release” system for new features and major changes, although the updates are all closed source and under Microsofts control. Windows 11 has had major annual updates 21H2, 22H2, 23H2, 24H2, and now 25H2. One big difference though is that Windows updates are only Windows and Microsoft provided software; all the rest of the OS including drivers the user has to update (or sometimes Windows Update manages). On Linux, much more of the system is usually updated by the Distro, and the user generally updates a much smaller proportion themselves (e.g. maybe their Nvidia drivers, and their flatpaks).

The big point releases are not about increased security, they are instead more about getting feature releases out to users from lots of different projects. The security side is managed by constant patches and smaller bugfixes rolled out within each major version.

If you’re on a 6 monthly distro, you probably won’t notice big changes, you’ll more likely see lots of smaller changes. The really big changes (like KDE moving from 5.0 to 6.0) are less frequent - maybe every couple of years - while the smaller but still substantial changes are frequent - like 6.2 to 6.3. You will notice when you move from 5.0 to 6.0 but when you move from 6.2 to 6.3 you’ll have lots of smaller nice changes but not a major change to your desktop. So while it seems like little is changing, lots of small things are changing all the time.

So 113k released between 2016 and 2025 is about 12600 a year. We have only been told that 5863 games made more than 100k last year, not what their total lifetime revenues are. Bearing in mind games generally make the most money in the first year of release (of course there there is big variation and there is a tail but mostly), then very crudely as much as 46% of new games could be making at least 100K in the first year. That’s an overestimate for many reasons but 5% is also a huge underestimate as the figure is using at all games released across 9 years and diluting the the 1 year figure we have. Also we need to bare in mind how much of the Steam library is slop and not an actual fully formed game, or is place holder entries for things like demos and even DLC.

The real figure will sit between those two extreme limits, it’s not going to be as low as 5% but also not as high as 46%.

Faster than what? Assuming you’re currently on a version of Windows, then moving to a lightweight Linux distro running a low footprint desktop environment would likely free up system resources for your web browsing. Windows is bloated and not maintained for older or lower powered hardware. The S145 seems to be a dual core Celeron based system so you’ll get reasonable performance benefits switching to a less resource hungry and less bloated OS.

I’d try something like MX Linux XFCE for a familiar windows like interface but with a smaller footprint freeing up resources for web browsing. You could also try MX Linux Fluxbox for an even lighter-weight desktop environment.

In terms of browser, I’d recommend sticking with Firefox (or derivatives like Libre Wolf) or Chromium if you want to stay closer to Chrome. I’d ditch chrome for privacy reasons rather than speed; most browsers are bloated these days and changing the OS will probably make the bigger impact when running lower powered hardware.

At this rate we’ll need a Wine/Proton that runs on Windows to allow you to run Windows software.

I find it strange how in the US “moderate” involves frequently invoking Christian faith. Here in Europe that’d be seen as right wing conservative behaviour.

Ah! So it’s your fault! Get him!

Christ Trump looks at death’s door in the photo.

If we built a self replicating probe and sent it to the nearest system, and from there it sent off 2 more probes and so on, in 2 million years they’d have reached every system. The only cost would be the initial probe. and any species that has mastered it’s own star system could do that. They could send out their own genetic material and spread their form of live.

They don’t have to go themselves out into space, they can send automated machines. We’ve already started doing just that with very basic machines for scientific curiosity. I see no reason why we wouldn’t send out replicating probes when we have the technology to do it.

However we do come back to Fermi’s Paradox: the universe is 13800million years old. So far we have no evidence a probe has reached our star system. Where are they? Maybe we just haven’t stumbled across one yet. Or maybe life really is very rare?

I’m pretty sure its the one the where Janeway and Tom Paris get in a transporter accident and become “Janris”. They drank copious amounts of coffee while hitting on any one with a pulse, until the Doctor deleted his own ethical routines to save the crew.

So who benefits from $30bn in spending on Laptops and Tablets? Oh Apple and Microsoft. Not students. Surprise surprise.

As with many of these articles there is a big caveat - Gen Z in the USA. It does not follow that this research applies across the world. It’d be interesting to see how other rich countries outcomes are different with their differing approaches to this. For example here in the UK I don’t believe there has been a wholesale move to laptops/tablets for every student in schools. Technology is certainly used but it’s not solely about students using laptops and tablets. Its things like smart wide boards, and the use of digital content to engage attention and so forth. Spending billions on laptops for all would be a scandal when school buildings need renewing for example.

I would hazard to suggest that the US education system is being corrupted in a similar way to other parts of the US state, with big expensive projects decided at state level by the Republicans and Democrats thanks to lobbying, benefiting big companies but not citizens. This is instead of money going to areas of proven benefit such as more teachers, school infrastructure renewal, or funding of homework clubs, after school activities, breakfast clubs or free school meals. Things proven to make a difference across the world but things that don’t benefit big US corporations.

And lets be honest, if you wanted to give every student a laptop you wouldn’t be going to Apple or Microsoft. You’d save money and go for generic hardware and a license free operating system like Linux. But that would be an anathema to both the Democrats and the Republicans, who have signed off huge spending on overpriced tech.

In fairness to Mozilla, Firefox and Thunderbird are platform agnostic. It’s not really for them to tell users what OS to use. It’d cause them more aggro than its worth from all the people who have differing opinions on what the best OS is or the best distro to use. It’s already a tightrope act keeping their users happy when they announce things like AI in the browser. I think they’re right to focus on their own areas of interest.

Most home users use a PC for internet browsing, watching videos, gaming and maybe a bit of basic word processing - all of which Linux does well and for free.

So yes absolutely, vast majority of people should stop wasting money paying for software licenses and go free.

tuna steak is fish, so why isn’t it tuna fish steak?

Americans do love redundancies. e.g Just barely, only just, just a bit, true facts, free gift, end result, advance warning etc.

Nah that’s it. Their logic is seemingly if you don’t give the money to Google it’s not contributing to economic growth.

Unfortunately the old favourable terms are gone and won’t come back. Too toxic in Europe and only 1 country would need to veto it to stop it. Iit’s very unlikely the UK will rejoin in the near future as the Common Agricultural Programme remains broken, and signing up for the Euro would remain very toxic. Those are the two big exceptions we had. And of course, free movement of people remains politically toxic in the UK, and we’d never get an exception to that.

I was strongly in favour of remaining, and I’m leaning in favour of rejoining but I’m not massively keen. The reason being Europe was very politically controversial in British politics for decades and Brexit dominated politics for years over all other issues. I am in favour of rejoining the customs union; but even that will be a big ask in the UK and in Europe.

The right wing in the UK are against regulatory alignment and “taking orders” from Europe. And our broken first-past-the-post electoral system gives them disproportionate power in this country. European neighbours would rightly be risk-averse for signing a deal with the UK which another right wing government could just come along and tear up.

The UK should focus on electoral reform before ever considering rejoining the EU. We need true representative democracy, instead of the joke elections we have had such as Boris Johnson getting a huge majority in parliament. He got 44% of the vote and got 56% of the seats, forcing his version of Brexit on the country. And within that parliament the right wing had power within his party because there were enough of them to deny him his majority - their deal or no deal. So we got a hard Brexit. And any deals other governments make can be unpicked in the same way - a small extreme right wing minority can dominate the discourse.

So forget rejoining; push for proportional representation. Our democracy is backwards and stuck in the 19th century.

I seem to be the only one confused by this - what leak? Is it just a typo?

A leak is when something is released without authorisation? So far the only information is authorised releases of the files with lots of stuff redacted, and allegations there is more being held back. Has there been a leak too?

The article is very biased - it basically suggests young people are unwilling to read, that AI is a good thing and that the wikipedia contributors are being unreasonable. It goes on to talk about how AI has “extracted value” from Wikipedia in an unquestioning way - no mention of compensation to the project, just talking about what a triumph Wikipedia is a source for AI to train on.

The “Simple Summaries” situation is less to do with the summaries and more to do with the risk of AI slop being introduced into Wikipedia unquestioned. The summaries were unchecked and unverified, which add a real chance that wikipedia started serving up inaccurate summaries and undermined it’s own reputation.

In addition that idea that younger generations don’t have the concentration span to “read a wall of text” is pernicious and patronising nonsense part of a general media bias against Gen Z and Gen Alpha. There seems to be this barely questioned narrative that they have short attention spans and are unwilling or even unable to read, just because they grew up in the era of social media like Instagram and latterly Tik Tok.

I’ll give a better hypothesis for why younger generations spend less time on wikipedia: the big tech giants like Google have stolen all the information people have put on there and serve it up in their own summaries on the search engine (preventing click throughs) or through their own AI slop engines. They don’t want people clicking through to Wikipedia, they want them clicking through to an ad. The problem is not Wikipedia, and the problem is not Gen Z or Gen Alpha; the problem - as is frequently the case - is the tech mega-corporations who steal everything (including wikipedia) and sell it back to us with ads or via AI slop.

Both sides announced this to boost their share prices as they’re both growth stocks. Growth stocks are a trap - no company can keep on growing forever.

This announcement is a sign the AI boom is probably soon to end. Nvidia quietly announcing the $100bn deal isn’t going to happen, is Nvidia trying to reduce it’s exposure to the bubble popping. Unfortunately for Nvidia, it’s already way way too deep into the mess, and the vast majority of it’s value is speculative. The question is have they damaged their core business by chasing the AI bubble, and what liabilities will they be left with if their customers go bankrupt and don’t pay them for their product.