They probably are waiting for the open source driver to be rock-solid, and it’s getting there.

SteamOS will have the same issues, Nvidia doesn’t like to play nice on Linux.

Might be a bit early to make such a statement - This is her third video. While I agree that her videos will undoubtedly have more personal effort put in and will have significantly less restrictions as compared to the content churn at LTT, I think you’re underestimating the impact the Linux videos she did had and the reach that LTT, flawed as they are, have. Emily’s not gonna really reach as many tech “converts” (people who might get into tech but aren’t really yet), just people already into it, which is fine, but y’know, it’s nice to be able to get people into the hobby. Don’t let your hate for LTT, the organization, blind you to the effort Emily put in to make good videos while there!

I’ve been using Ubuntu for years and I like KDE, so I’m using Neon. Ubuntu is familiar, easy to fix, easy to find out how to fix, and neon doesn’t come with snaps.

Waypipe?

Sure, but them stonewalling KDE for months with libadwaita theming preventing gnome apps from using the breeze theme properly on KDE is a bad decision - one that should never have happened. They eventually worked it out, but they shouldn’t have first told the KDE devs to essentially pound sand, especially given KDE goes out of their way to make their apps use gnome’s themes correctly no matter what, so your gnome system looks right when using KDE apps. The same courtesy should be expected from GNOME, at least to provide the scaffolding for that.

That is the kind of bad decisions I thought of when they brought it up. Or heck, why isn’t dash to dock built into gnome at this point? Like a quarter of the gnome users (and yes, they checked their telemetry and found this to be true) were using it - that’s obviously something that even if it goes against their design philosophy the DE should have built-in at this point. I think if you’re not in the GNOME weeds, you won’t see the kinds of boneheaded decisions they have made over the years.

I understand what you mean here, but how can KDE realistically make commercial software vendors port their software to Linux? What group or groups could incentivize this, and how can it be done without creating significant user growth first? (it’s a chicken and egg problem, so you can’t wait until the users are there if they’re waiting on software to be available)

No, you’re not understanding what I’m getting at here. Linux is not windows. It cannot and should not aim to recreate it exactly, that’s a stupid idea from the get-go and will fail if attempted. Making every windows program work on Linux is also very difficult, but also, that’s the Wine team’s job, not KDE’s - KDE devs don’t have the expertise or knowledge to do that work. MacOS isn’t bad because it’s not identical to Windows, Linux should be judged similarly. It not being identical being seen as an issue is a mode of thinking that cannot lead to success. KDE has to be worth using because it’s good in its own right, not because it’s Windows without Microsoft.

To be fair, a lot of the things you listed are impossible for KDE to fix. You can’t make every single windows program work on Linux, you shouldn’t make KDE have exactly the same workflows as Windows, KDE isn’t gonna make it easier/better to install Linux on NTFS, and they have no control over tutorials that instruct people to update their software - How could any of these be used as a roadmap?

You’re right! I thought the meaning of whataboutism was more specific than it was, you just have to respond to an accusation with another accusation, that’s it! TIL

Oh, it’s definitely ad-hominem, that I agree with - they were literally testing your biases, as they stated. I don’t think it’s whataboutism, just ad hominem, actually. They’re accusing you of being as biased as anyone else, then asking a shibboleth to prove their point - the whole premise is ad hominem at that point. I think the differentiating factor is that the questions were about your beliefs, not about the actual events they brought up.

No, it’s really not. Once they said “litmus test”, that makes it clear they’re doing it intentionally, not as a logical fallacy - it’s gauging bias on common topics, which is relevant to a discussion on bias and propaganda. It’s not a series of seemingly-related non-sequiturs that have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

I’d love to be proven wrong here - how is what they brought up not relevant to the topic of bias and propaganda, especially wrt the west?

That’s literally not whataboutism - whataboutism is when you use irrelevant topics to incorrectly prove a point. The poster literally said it was a litmus test, which means mentioning multiple things as they did is correct and is not whataboutism, especially since their argument is about propaganda.

If they’re on android, try revanced. It’s a patched YouTube apk, so the interface is the same (unless you change stuff, like, for example, disabling shorts - but by default, it’s the same).

Yes, except online exams. The online spyware they make you install for those is designed not to work on a VM or anything like that. I had to keep a barebones windows partition around just for that.

You’re welcome! I’ve had to do that exact process more than once, so I had a sneaking suspicion you weren’t quite up shit’s creek yet.

Live boot Linux, install testdisk in there, and try to see if it can find it. It’s probably still there.

And you think there’s not bias in those rules that’s notable, and that the edge cases I mentioned won’t be an issue, or what?

You seem to have sidestepped what I’ve said to rant about how OpenAI sucks when that was just meant to be an example of how even those best informed about AI in the world right now don’t really understand it.

Sure, who will it impersonate if you don’t? That’s where the bias comes in.

And yes, they do need a guide, because the way chatbots behave is not intuitive or clear, there’s lots of weird emergent behavior in them even experts don’t fully understand (see OpenAI’s 4o sycophancy articles today). Chatbots’ behavior looks obvious, and in many cases it is…until it isn’t. There’s lots of edge cases.

Something that annoys me about people who love to harp on about how bad Mozilla is because they’ve gone downhill (which they have): Who is better? Genuinely compare them to their competition. Google? Heck no. Brave? Nope. Microsoft? Absolutely not. Apple? No. People complain about how much Mozilla spends on advocacy, but then when they actually do the advocacy, they’re happy about it! They’re perpetually stuck between a rock and a hard place because they’re pulled in both directions and thus, Firefox suffers. But, are they actually a broken clock? Really?

I guess to be a little clearer: If you compare Mozilla to their past selves, they lose. If you compare Mozilla to anyone else in that space with the resources to develop a browser, they’re still the best of the bunch by a country mile.