So biased. If you don’t know what distro to choose, go with kubuntu, mint, or pop. That simple.

Kubuntu. Unless you come from osx(then gnome), or have a really old computer.

Because not using OOP is hard for gui devs.

You are right in spirit.

It was not sysv to systemD, and it was forced (by making udev not work without it).

Other then nvidia, wayland is still missing some protocols (example: what virtual desktop you want your window to be on). But those protocols are (still) being worked on. And you will always be able to run x11 programs on wayland.

The advantages of wayland are a more direct path to hardware, and trowing away lots of code.

Yes, the first movie.

Didn’t work on my last two sound cards, and always had latency problems for many people.

JACK is for profesionals. If you need to take an input from an instrument, run it through a software filter, and output it immediately. Or if you need to output from one program to another to another. Etc. Usually that means small buffers and a lot of cpu usage. Not really for normal desktop users. Grab a specialized distro like ubuntu studio and try it, if you want.

It’s more like JACK for desktop. PA was never good, just obvious bad design.

Kubuntu. Easy as that.

Gnome 3 is made to be like osx. Osx is popular in usa.

It is not nice to generalize.

It’s not.

Bow > spear > sword (and shield, ofc) > whack.

Range ftw.

Ubuntu got to be most popular because they focused on making it easy to setup and use by non-technical people. Even now they, for example, patch gnome to make it usable.

There are already enough satelites for airplane and sea (and middle of rainforest) internet. Skylink, or whatever it’s called, was made for price gauged, infrastructure money laundered, usaians. Actually idk what it’s made for. I don’t see the point of private rocket companies at all. Guy was talking like elon, how we need to escape earth or something. Like it’s not our problem.

Going to space now. I know nasa has contributed to humanity. They are even planing to make a radio telescope on the moon. Spacex is… putting internet into space. Internet… into space. Instead of laying fiber and building radio towers, burning fuel to put a lot of satelites that need to be periodically replaced. They are even making the same mistakes that others have learned from. If that money went into proper research on just about anything… If that money went into fiber… If that money went to nasa, that is doing something actually useful. That money and work is going into burning fuel.

And yea, i get it, rockets are cool. Space is cool. But spacex is not about advancing humanity or anything.

Is the long list written anywhere ? And are they practical right now to everybody kind of reasons, or are they “in this hypothetical far future” kind of reasons ?

I know it’s cool and all, but we know how to shoot things into space already.

You are conflating good and powerfull. The basic 1800£ one from then isnt even that powerfull. Half price from samsung or something would be the same. It’s just not worth it, not by a long shot.

2.4GHz, for water. Wouldn’t go 1mm beneath your skin. Better to use xrays or pozitrons or something.

https://gpt4all.io/index.html

Says ubuntu, works fine on my non-apt distro.

Idk if GPT4All is what you want.