46zFAv8KHaKVuYDTJ15TXAah6SCXw88Dx9UhTuUJa6ydb8m9uGLaYE3AX5JPFhsJjJ6w7NMc7vNYwQPhGkt3tE2L7pwgrte

npub1m5s9w4t03znyetxswhgq0ud7fq8ef8y3l4kscn2e8wkvmv42hh3qujgjl3

https://codeberg.org/mister_monster

09F911029D74E35BD84156C5635688C0

  • 3 Posts
  • 107 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 14th, 2023

help-circle


  • I’ve been trying to figure out exactly what the point of this is. I haven’t asked Alex (haven’t talked directly to him in a long time as I have mostly abandoned fedi) but I know he’s the first prominent fedi dev to sort of pivot to nostr (a good sign; too many prominent fedi people are more interested in preserving their fiefdoms than the ultimate goal of all this) and has been building some interoperability stuff.

    What I see at first glance is an attempt to slap fedi social model onto nostr? Trying to create a client that gives users a TWKN and local feed of some kind? I don’t know, perhaps someone can clear it up for me.

    Anyway, I don’t really see the point, a primary benefit of nostr is the lack of network fragmentation and siloing. There’s some fragmentation that does occur with failures to fetch notes from relays and things, but not the network splitting and banlist passing and siloed networks like you get on fedi. Trying to shoehorn that UX back into nostr kind of misses the point IMO. I like the idea of community creation as a sort of organizational thing for feed curation without direct follows, it helps discoverability, particularly along lines of shared interest, but I don’t really see how the “web ring” like follow structure doesn’t achieve that already without the downside of building silos. A global feed, I see no point of that at all.











  • mister_monster@monero.towntoPrivacy@lemmy.mlFUTO Keyboard app
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    I use heliboard and futo for speech to text. I was using sayboard for stt, and it worked OK, but futo just seems so much better at it. So far in liking it, I didn’t know they released a keyboard as well, I won’t be giving it a try but I hope it works out, I’d prefer FOSS.



  • mister_monster@monero.towntoLinux@lemmy.mlI deleted windows and installed linux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    I have never, once, run into an issue due to rolling release. I have never once read the news before updating. I’ve never had an update on arch break my system, never.

    “Bleeding edge” is beta or alpha releases, people running those are the guinea pigs. All packages in default arch repositories are release versions, intended for use by users.

    It is always expected to update your system periodically, no matter what distro or even software you’re using.

    None of these are actual problems

    Yes, and I argue that this is true of new users as well.

    normally just works

    Yes, very user friendly

    excellent wiki to get answers.

    Yes. All users of systems, new, intermediate, advanced, and of any system, including windows and Mac, google stuff sometimes and look for information. This is probably one of the most important components for any software, the more easy it is to find information the better it will be. You can’t find anything up to date on Ubuntu anymore, you’re in a forum with a post from 2008 following outdated information.

    expected to read the wiki

    yes, when using software it is expected that at some point you’ll want to look at documentation, so documentation needs to be detailed, accurate and up to date.

    This problem you’re talking about with packages A B and C and wrong versions and stuff, I’ve never run into it. I’m sure it can happen, but I’ve never seen it. I have run into it on Debian based systems, every time I’ve tried to run one for a few months I get broken dependencies and stuff due to mismatched versions. Basically every problem after your edit applies to all package managers, forcing yes on dialogs (the “y” in -Sy) is always dangerous, “apt purge” and “apt autoremove” to clean cache and remove unneeded dependencies, this stuff isn’t unique to pacman, and again, I’ve only ever seen it on Debian, it’s theoretically possible on arch but a guarantee on Debian that you’ll run into these problems.

    But we are getting lost in the weeds. Give someone an endeavorOS installer and a Linux Mint installer, will there be a noticable difference in ease of use? No, there won’t, generally what determines user friendliness is the DE. The few things they could get stuck on are in the terminal, that applies regardless of the distro, and the big difference is the package manager, and like I’ve said, I’ve never had pacman break, I’ve had apt break something every time I’ve run it for a few months.


  • The wiki just likes to make the details available. Installation of nextcloud is as easy as pacman -S nextcloud

    You’re comparing a simple install guide with the entire detailed documentation of a package. of course the package docs are going to have more details.

    Ignoring details is not the same as being user friendly. Having a bunch of corpo marketing pictures of slightly above average people smiling on video chat in your installation docs does not make something user friendly. Is this really the metric we are going by, how little information is in the documentation?



  • mister_monster@monero.towntoLinux@lemmy.mlI deleted windows and installed linux
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    OK I’m gettimg frustrated now, because you’re making literally no points at all, and now you’re quoting yourself. A whole lot of words saying absolutely nothing.

    You didn’t lay out “fault in my logic”, you just asked me what I mean by robust. Do you have anything to actually say or do you just like the sound of your own voice?




  • OK, so Debian is not rolling release, arch is. If rolling release causes the system to implode, doesn’t that make arch more user friendly?

    I’m the one that’s says the only thing unfriendly about arch is the installation. That’s a point I’m making. And truth be told, most of what a user interacts with is the DE, installation is the only real sticking point between all these systems at this point, that and package management. Outside of installation and the package manager they’re basically the same as far as the casual user is concerned. And for arch, once you get past the installation, it’s package manager is just better than apt. And EndeavorOS does the installation for you. So it’s better.