Pup Biru

original comment still stands:

I’m not sure it’s devil’s advocate: I work with computers for 40 hours a week. There’s no way that I want to put any effort into a computer in my personal time

this is not linux and android. this is apple

in the context of this comment - not putting any effort into a computer - customisation and workarounds are irrelevant

you’re completely right, but only bank sanctions are relevant to the majority of people, and really are bank sanctions relevant to most people???

however, that wasn’t the point you were making in your original comment

there are no distros or combinations of software that come close to what mac/iphone/apple tv provide even WITH effort; let alone without. they have other benefits, but ease of integration is not one of them

rust was literally written as a systems programming language to take a similar place as C. i’m not sure of the restrictions you mean

worth clarifying though afaik brave has said they won’t remove v2; not that they will continue to support it… ie if there’s a breaking change in upstream chromium, i’m not sure i have confidence that they’ll spend a bunch of time working around it

stupidity is a once-off

malice is a pattern

and even if it’s not malicious, a pattern of stupid action needs to be stopped just as much as malicious action

this changes nothing: microsoft should have sent a patch remains microsoft should have sent a patch; internal policies are irrelevant to actions effecting external projects

on top of what others have said - directing you to the app and login - it’s also likely just that teams don’t talk and make decisions that solve their local issue without too much for the whole, and then say “ugh team x solved this so inelegantly! we were forced to do our thing that wasn’t as nice!”

*without being sued for more than we would make from seizure induced deaths

just fork chromium again; why use a toolbar when you can have the whole browser!

that’s fair, and i think that in the context that we were both talking about, what we both wrote was reasonably correct

arch is a reliable OS that is sometimes unstable

but a server needs a stable OS to be reliable, which means that whilst arch can be a reliable OS, it does not make a particularly reliable server

disagreement is fine, but there was literally a thread about “linux disinformation” where the OP asked for examples of things people say about linux that are untrue

the top answers by FAR are that arch is stable

saying that arch is stable, or easy for newcomers is doing the linux ecosystem a disservice

you should never use arch for a server - arbitrary, rather than controlled and well-tested updates to the bleeding edge is literally everything you want to avoid in a server OS

snaps are like poor man’s containers when it comes to servers… maybe better than having single-use VMs but if you’re wanting to build out real systems in a modern way, i literally haven’t worked with anyone using ubuntu in the last ~10 years

arch is great if you don’t really care about your server being reliable (eg home lab) but their ethos isn’t really great for a server that has to be reliable… the constant update churn causes issues a lot more than i’d personally like for a server environment

it’s just less reliable, more corporate, more bloated debian

… so why would you?

if it’s in the correct place, correct read permissions/ownership, etc i’ve noticed that this is also the error that’s thrown when selinux denies the read: in my case i’d created the service file in my home directory, moved it, and because of that it was tagged incorrectly

i’m on my phone and don’t have time to lookup the resolution or how to check, but perhaps someone else can add that detail