Support / options for laptop in tablet mode?
I installed Linux Mint on my Lenovo Yoga 7 laptop and it's been great, with the one exception of not really having a tablet mode when I flip the screen. Its not a huge deal, but I watch shows that way and sometimes miss an on-screen keyboard.
The actual keyboard stays active when flipped, which is fine until I pick it up or have it on my lap and accidentally hit some random key.
It seems from some looking around that Mint doesn't do great with this and I'm open to a different distro that's fairly beginner friendly, but even better if there are some options I'm missing to keep what I have.
SpaceX crane collapse in Texas being investigated by OSHA
SpaceX crane collapse in Texas being investigated by OSHA
A SpaceX crane collapse at the company’s Starbase, Texas facility has prompted an investigation by OSHA, the federal agency told CNBC.Lora Kolodny, CNBC (NBC Southern California)
We need to stop pretending AI is intelligent
We are constantly fed a version of AI that looks, sounds and acts suspiciously like us. It speaks in polished sentences, mimics emotions, expresses curiosity, claims to feel compassion, even dabbles in what it calls creativity.But what we call AI today is nothing more than a statistical machine: a digital parrot regurgitating patterns mined from oceans of human data (the situation hasn’t changed much since it was discussed here five years ago). When it writes an answer to a question, it literally just guesses which letter and word will come next in a sequence – based on the data it’s been trained on.
This means AI has no understanding. No consciousness. No knowledge in any real, human sense. Just pure probability-driven, engineered brilliance — nothing more, and nothing less.
So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure. It doesn’t hunger, desire or fear. And because there is no cognition — not a shred — there’s a fundamental gap between the data it consumes (data born out of human feelings and experience) and what it can do with them.
Philosopher David Chalmers calls the mysterious mechanism underlying the relationship between our physical body and consciousness the “hard problem of consciousness”. Eminent scientists have recently hypothesised that consciousness actually emerges from the integration of internal, mental states with sensory representations (such as changes in heart rate, sweating and much more).
Given the paramount importance of the human senses and emotion for consciousness to “happen”, there is a profound and probably irreconcilable disconnect between general AI, the machine, and consciousness, a human phenomenon.
We need to stop pretending AI is intelligent – here’s how
AI may appear human, but it is an illusion we must tackle.The Conversation
like this
originalucifer and Dessalines like this.
So why is a real “thinking” AI likely impossible? Because it’s bodiless. It has no senses, no flesh, no nerves, no pain, no pleasure. It doesn’t hunger, desire or fear. And because there is no cognition — not a shred — there’s a fundamental gap between the data it consumes (data born out of human feelings and experience) and what it can do with them.
What? No.
Chatbots can't think because they literally aren't designed to think. If you somehow gave a chatbot a body it would be just as mindless because it's just a probability engine.
like this
funbreaker likes this.
Exactly. People see “AI” and think LLMs and diffusion models. Those are both probabilistic translation engines. They’re no more intelligent than an AC/DC converter, just a lot more complex.
However, there are neural networks and sense arrays in the field of AI, and those are designed to replicate the process of thought.
The real route to a thinking AI is likely a combination of the two, where a neural network can call on expert systems including translation engines to do the heavy lifting and then run a more nuanced decision tree over the results.
Thing is, modern LLMs and diffusion models are already more complex than a single human mind can fully comprehend, so we default to internally labelling them as either “like us” or “magic”, even when we theoretically know them to be nothing but really deep predictive models.
They’re no more intelligent than an AC/DC converter
The problem is in the definition of intelligence.
To me, intelligence is simply problem-solving ability. It does not necessarily imply consciousness, having self-awareness or anything like that. A simple calculator is already displaying intelligence, even if limited to a very narrow situational set of problems, in the sense that it can resolve mathematical questions.
That doesn't mean the calculator is self aware.. it just means it can resolve problems. Biological systems can also resolve problems without necessarily being aware of what they are doing.. does the fungus actually knows it's solving a maze the scientists prepared for it when it just expands following what is preprogrammed by its biological instincts determined by natural selection? Do the ants really know what they are doing when they find the shortest path just by instinctively following a scent of pheromones left by other ants?
Knowing exactly what causes consciousness is an entirely different problem.. and it's one that has not been resolved by any scientist or philosopher in a satisfactory manner. So we simply do not know that.
Seems to me your definition of intelligence ignores whole aspects of true intelligence, at least of the human kind, such as emotional intelligence and social intelligence and artistic intelligence and moral intelligence...
"Problem solving" is the name for what you described and it doesn't necessarily require intelligence. In fact most intelligent people have encountered situations where it made solving a problem more difficult.
Yes there there as many types of intelligence as there are types of problems. Emotional intelligence deals with emotional problems, social intelligence deals with social problems. This doesn't conflict with my definition, it's still problem solving.
Just because a being is intelligent does not mean it can solve all the problems of all kinds, it would require general intelligence, and even a generally intelligent being needs the right training... if you are trained wrong or trained for a different kind of problem that does not fit the current one then your current experience might actually get in the way, as you point out.
Yes, that's what I meant 2 comments above by "fungus" (though to be fair, whether slime molds are fungi depends on your definition, they used to be classified as one, before "protist kingdom" was made up to mix protozoa, algae & molds, but I keep preferring the traditional autotroph / absorptive heterotroph / digestive heterotroph division).
I also mentioned ants who can find the optimal path by simply following scents left by other ants without understanding how this helps with that.
You can be intelligent without being aware of your intelligence, or you can be stupid without being aware of your stupidity... like how humans are actually creating problems for themselves in many cases.
Intelligence != awareness
I don't know, I feel it's actually the opposite. Awareness is something you can only experience subjectively, it's "qualia", a quality that you cannot measure outside of yourself or detect externally. There's a reason IQ ("intelligence" quotient) tests use puzzles/problems and don't test conscious awareness. Most of the time in science intelligence is defined as problem solving and capacity to adapt/extrapolate because that definition makes it observable and more scientifically useful.
If it were to include awareness then we can't in good faith answer the question: "is it intelligent?" ..we can only say we don't know. This is the main struggle of philosophy of the mind, what is often called "the hard problem of consciousness". Empirical analysis would not show if something is having (or not) the conscious experience of being aware.
Let me rephrase. If your definition of intelligence includes slime mold then the term is not very useful.
There's a reason philosophy of the mind exists as a field of study. If we just assign intelligence to anything that can solve problems, which is what you seem to be doing, we are forced to assign intelligence to things which clearly don't have minds and aren't aware and can't think. That's a problem.
Why is it a problem?
Generally, I'd say having clear, specific and useful definitions is a good thing to help communicate and understand what we are talking about and avoid misinterpretations.
What is the reason you think philosophy of the mind exists as a field of study?
What is the reason you think philosophy of the mind exists as a field of study?
In part, so we don't assign intelligence to mindless, unaware, unthinking things like slime mold - it's so we keep our definitions clear and useful, so we can communicate about and understand what intelligence even is.
What you're doing actually creates an unclear and useless definition that makes communication harder and spreads misunderstanding. Your definition of intelligence, which is what the AI companies use, has made people more confused than ever about "intelligence" and only serves the interests of the companies for generating hype and attracting investor cash.
There are many philosophers of the mind that agree that intelligence and consciousness are separate things.
Some examples are Daniel Dennett and John Searle.
There are also currents of thought in philosophy of the mind that disagree that even things like "slime mold" are mindless. Both from the materialist direction (like panpsychysm) and from the idealist direction (Bernardo Kastrup's idealism).
Most philosophers of the mind would disagree that the reason for their field to exist really has anything to do with any specific terminology / position. I'd say it has more to do with curiosity and the interest for seeking truth. Like most fields of philosophy do.
Your definition of intelligence, which is what the AI companies use, has made people more confused than ever about “intelligence” and only serves the interests of the companies for generating hype and attracting investor cash.
I'd argue it's your definition, which includes consciousness, what makes AI an attractive term for investors. Precisely because you say intelligence include awareness and it can lead to people to misinterpret AI as self-aware.
Promoting your definition helps the interests of the companies who want to generate hype, and causes just as much confusion as you attribute to mine in that regard.
At least mine is simpler and makes it easier to invalidate the hype, since if intelligence isn't awareness then AI isn't awareness. Many philosophers have agreed with that, for years, before LLMs were a thing. John Searle for example is famous for the Chinese room experiment.
All the evidence suggests that our own minds are also nothing more than probability engines. The reason we consider humans to be intelligent is because our brains learn to model the events in the physical world that are fed into our brains by the nervous system. The whole purpose of a brain is to try and keep the body in a state of homeostasis. That's the basis for our volition. The brain gets data about about the state of the organism, and interprets it as hunger, pain, fear, and so on. Then it uses its internal world model to figure out actions that will put the body into a more desirable state. From this perspective, embodiment would indeed be a necessary component of human style intelligence.
While LLMs on their own are unlikely to provide a sufficient basis for a reasoning system, its not strictly impossible that a model trained on sensory data from a robot body it inhabits wouldn't be able to build a representation of the world and its body that could be used as the basis for decision making and volition.
All the evidence suggests that our own minds are also nothing more than probability engines.
This completely understates the gulf between what we call AI and how the human brain actually works. The difference is so severe that acting as if they’re quantitatively comparable is basically pseudoscience. You might as well start claiming that we’re not far off from building a Dyson sphere just because we invented solar panels.
Most “AI” these days are built using linear feed forward networks. The brain is constructed using nonlinear recurrent networks which are can do far more with less. Now you could theoretically create the same output from a linear feed forward network but it’s way less efficient and would require many more neurons to achieve such a result. Which is wild when you consider that there are orders of magnitude more synapses in just the regions of the brain associated with language than there are parameters used in even today’s most advanced “AI” models. Now consider that human synapses rely on over a hundred qualitatively different neurotransmitters and not just a single 16-bit number. It’s also not just the scale of the signal that transmits information in a human synapse but the pattern too. Would you be surprised to know that there are a whole variety of signaling patterns neurons use? Because that’s true too. I haven’t even gotten into the differences in complexity in terms of how neurons process the information they receive. As of now there is no “AI” system that comes anywhere close to replicating that kind of complexity. It’s absurd to suggest where dealing with qualitatively similar machines here.
This completely understates the gulf between what we call AI and how the human brain actually works.
Way to completely misrepresent what I was actually saying. Nowhere was I suggesting that there isn't a huge difference between the two. What I pointed out is that, while undeniably more complex, our brains appear to work on similar principles.
My only point was that the feedback loop from embodiment creates the basis for volition, and that what we call intelligence is our ability to create internal models of the world that we use for decision making. So, this is likely a prerequisite for any artificial system that has any meaningful intelligence.
Maybe try engaging with that instead of writing a wall of text arguing with a straw man.
our brains appear to work on similar principles.
Sure in the same way that a horse and a motorcycle operate on similar principles and serve the same function.
Maybe try engaging with that instead of writing a wall of text arguing with a straw man.
Where the straw man? You’ve missed my point entirely. LLMs and the human mind operate on categorically different principles. All the verbiage used to describe neural network models has little to do with how the brain actually works. That’s honestly wasn’t a problem until Tech companies started purposely misusing those terms and now far too many people seem to think “AI” is something it’s not.
LLMs and the human mind operate on categorically different principles.
A bold statement given that we don't actually understand how the brain operates exactly and what algorithms that would translate into.
Where the straw man?
The straw man is you continuing to argue against equating LLMs with the functioning of the brain, something I never said here.
All the verbiage used to describe neural network models has little to do with how the brain actually works.
You appear to be conflating the implementation details of how the brain works with the what it's doing in a semantic sense. There is zero evidence that all the complexity of the brain is inherent to the way our reasoning functions. Again, we don't have a full understanding of how the brain accomplishes tasks like reasoning. It may be a lot more complex than what LLMs do, or it may not be. We do not know.
Finally, none of this has anything to do with the point I was actually making which is regarding embodiment. You decided to ignore that to focus on braying about tech companies and LLMs instead.
The straw man is you continuing to argue against equating LLMs with the functioning of the brain, something I never said here.
I’m not claiming you ever said they functioned exactly the same way. Im simply stating that you’re way off base when you claim that they appear to operate using the same principles or that all evidence suggests the human mind is nothing more than a probability machine. That’s not a straw man. You literally said those things.
There is zero evidence that all the complexity of the brain is inherent to the way our reasoning functions.
You’re betraying your own ignorance about neuroscience. The complexity of the brain is absolutely linked with its ability to reason and we have plenty of evidence to show that. The evolutionary process does not just create needless complexity if there is a more efficient path.
Again, we don’t have a full understanding of how the brain accomplishes tasks like reasoning. It may be a lot more complex than what LLMs do, or it may not be. We do not know.
This is such a silly statement especially when you’ve been claiming that both the brain and AI appear to work using the same principles. If you truly believe the mind is such a mystery then stop making that claim.
You decided to ignore that to focus on braying about tech companies and LLMs instead.
I don’t really care about your arguments concerning embodiment because they’re so beside the point when you just blowing right by the most basic principles of neuroscience.
I bring up tech companies because they’ve had a massively distorting effect on how many computer scientists think the world works. You’re not immune to it either simply because you’re a critic of capitalism. A ruthless criticism of that exists includes the very researchers whose work you’re taking at face value.
don't like this
☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆ doesn't like this.
Im simply stating that you’re way off base when you claim that they appear to operate using the same principles or that all evidence suggests the human mind is nothing more than a probability machine.
I literally said these things, and you never gave any actual counter argument to either of them.
You’re betraying your own ignorance about neuroscience. The complexity of the brain is absolutely linked with its ability to reason and we have plenty of evidence to show that. The evolutionary process does not just create needless complexity if there is a more efficient path.
You're betraying your ignorance of how biology works and illustrating that you have absolutely no business debating this subject. Efficiency is not the primary fitness function for evolution, it's survivability. And that means having a lot of redundancy baked into the system. Here's a concrete example for you of just how much of the brain isn't actually essential for normal day to day function. rifters.com/crawl/?p=6116
This is such a silly statement especially when you’ve been claiming that both the brain and AI appear to work using the same principles.
There's nothing silly in stating that the underlying principles are similar, but we don't understand a lot of the mechanics of the brain. If you truly can't understand such basic things there's little point trying to have a meaningful discussion.
I don’t really care about your arguments concerning embodiment because they’re so beside the point when you just blowing right by the most basic principles of neuroscience.
That's literally the whole context for this thread, it just doesn't fit with the straw man you want to argue about.
A ruthless criticism of that exists includes the very researchers whose work you’re taking at face value.
Whose work am I taking at face value specifically? You're just spewing nonsense here without engaging with anything I'm saying.
You’re betraying your ignorance of how biology works and illustrating that you have absolutely no business debating this subject.
Have some humility and willingness to learn.
Efficiency is not the primary fitness function for evolution, it’s survivability.
I didn’t say it was the primary function. I guess all that talk about straw men was just projection. You don’t trust me, fine. Then what about Darwin who literally said, “Natural selection is continually trying to economize every part of the organization.” Now please go and read some introductory texts on biology before trying to explain to me why Darwin is wrong. There’s so much going on when it comes to the thermodynamics of living systems and you’re clearly not ready to have a conversation about it.
Here’s a concrete example for you of just how much of the brain isn’t actually essential for normal day to day function.
You’re baseless assuming that hydrocephalus causes the brain to lose a substantial amount of its complexity. Where is the evidence for that? In most of these cases it seems much of the outer layers of the cerebral cortex are in tact. It’s also really telling that your citation’s first source is an article titled “Is Your Brain Really Necessary” which is followed in the Journal by another article entitled “Math and Sex: Are Girls Born with Less Ability?”. But hey neuroscience hasn’t really advanced at all since 1980 right? The brain is totally redundant right? There’s no possible way a critical and discerning person such as yourself could have been taken in by junk science, right?!!
That’s literally the whole context for this thread, it just doesn’t fit with the straw man you want to argue about.
I took issue with specific statements you made that stand apart from the rest of your comment. That’s not a straw man. Although honestly this is on me. What can I expect from someone who thinks LLMs and the Human Brain are operating on similar principles? You’re so wound up in a pseudoscientific fiction there’s nothing I can do. You might as well start believing in the astrology, crystals, and energy healing. At least those interests will make you seem fun and quirky instead of just an over confident tech bro.
Have some humility and willingness to learn.
I have plenty of willingness to learn from people who have a clue on the subject.
I didn’t say it was the primary function.
You literally tried to argue that evolution doesn't create complexity if there's a more efficient path.th.
Then what about Darwin who literally said, “Natural selection is continually trying to economize every part of the organization.” Now please go and read some introductory texts on biology before trying to explain to me why Darwin is wrong. There’s so much going on when it comes to the thermodynamics of living systems and you’re clearly not ready to have a conversation about it.
Again, you're showing a superficial understanding of the subject here. Natural selection selects for overall fitness, and efficiency is only a small part of equation. For example, plants don't use the most efficient wavelength for producing energy, they use the one that's most reliably available. Similarly, living organisms have all kinds of redundancies that allow them to continue to function when they're damaged. Evolution optimizes for survival over efficiency.
You’re baseless assuming that hydrocephalus causes the brain to lose a substantial amount of its complexity.
Maybe read the actual paper linked there?
But hey neuroscience hasn’t really advanced at all since 1980 right? The brain is totally redundant right? There’s no possible way a critical and discerning person such as yourself could have been taken in by junk science, right?!!
What I linked you is a case study of an actual living person who was missing large parts of their brain and had a relatively normal life. But hey why focus on the actual facts when you can just write more word salad right?
I took issue with specific statements you made that stand apart from the rest of your comment.
You took issue with made up straw man arguments that you yourself made and have fuck all with what I actually said. Then you proceeded to demonstrate that you don't actually understand the subject you're debating. You might as well start believing in the astrology, crystals, and energy healing. At least those interests will make you seem fun and quirky instead of just a sad debate bro.
My understanding is that the reason LLMs struggle with solving math and logic problems is that those have certain answers, not probabilistic ones. That seems pretty fundamentally different from humans! In fact, we have a tendency to assign too much certainty to things which are actually probabilistic, which leads to its own reasoning errors. But we can also correctly identify actual truth, prove it through induction and deduction, and then hold onto that truth forever and use it to learn even more things.
We certainly do probabilistic reasoning, but we also do axiomatic reasoning i.e. more than probability engines.
Neurosymbolic AI -- Why, What, and How
Humans interact with the environment using a combination of perception - transforming sensory inputs from their environment into symbols, and cognition - mapping symbols to knowledge about the environment for supporting abstraction, reasoning by anal…arXiv.org
I don't really understand what the author is afraid of.
People sharing personal data they shouldn't? How is that an AI issue, we leave personal info all over the web.
People asking emotional questions of a non thinking machine? Should we toss out our magic eight balls too? Obviously there should be safeguards around the kind of issues a chatbot can answer, but that seems unrelated to the belief/perception of lmm intelligence.
They talk about fictional harms if this technology were to progress, yet there no example of harm present with today?
They say the true fear should be of the corporation or government, what exactly should we be afraid of, and how would stripping the chatbot of it's affect safeguard us?
People are missing the point of the author here and the author is missing how far AI has come.
Msot AI today has no senses which is why it's so disjointed.
That doesn't make it a digital parrot without the bird part of the parrot,
but it does make it a superbrain in a vat.
AI in cars and drones however do have the intelligence of insects.
I'm not sure why so many people begin this argument on solid ground and then hurl themselves off into a void of semantics and assertions without any way of verification.
Saying, "Oh it's not intelligent because it doesn't have senses," shifts your argument to proving that's a prerequisite.
The problem is that LLM isn't made to do cognition. It's not made for analysis. It's made to generate coherent human speech. It's an incredible tool for doing that! Simply astounding, and an excellent example of the power of how a trained model can adapt to a task.
It's ridiculous that we managed to get a probabilistic software tool which generates natural language responses so well that we find it difficult to distinguish them from real human ones.
...but it's also an illusion with regards to consciousness and comprehension. An LLM can't understand things for the same reason your toaster can't heat up your can of soup. It's not for that, but it presents an excellent illusion of doing so. Companies that are making these tools benefit from the fact that we anthropomorphize things, allowing them to straight up lie about what their programs can do because it takes real work to prove they can't.
Average customers will engage with LLM as if it was a doing a Google search, reading the various articles and then summarizing them, even though it's actually just completing the prompt you provided. The proper way to respond to a question is an answer, so they always will unless a hard coded limit overrides that. There will never be a way to make a LLM that won't create fictitious answers to questions because they can't tell the difference between truth or fantasy. It's all just a part of their training data on how to respond to people.
I've gotten LLM to invent books, authors and citations when asking them to discuss historical topics with me. That's not a sign of awareness, it's proof that the model is doing what it's intended to do- which is the problem, because it is being marketed as something that could replace search engines and online research.
aklsdfjaksl;dfjkl;asdf
:::
Israeli minister calls for ‘complete halt’ of aid to Gaza
Itamar Ben-Gvir says that he will “demand” Benjamin Netanyahu put a new vote to the country’s cabinet on the issue of the introduction of aid to Gaza.
He said in a post on X: The humanitarian aid currently entering Gaza is an absolute disgrace. What is needed in Gaza is not a temporary halt to the “humanitarian” aid, but a complete halt to it.
When I warned and warned, and unfortunately the only one who voted a month and a half ago against the introduction of the aid, it was clear to me that it would give oxygen to Hamas.
There were those who mocked me and claimed that “the aid that will enter the northern Gaza Strip will only last for 10 days,” and today what was known in advance is becoming clear: Hamas is taking control of the quantities of food and goods that contribute to its survival.
Stopping the aid will quickly advance us to victory. I will demand from the Prime Minister that at the upcoming cabinet meeting the issue of the introduction of aid to Gaza be put up for a new vote.
Middle East crisis: Iran delivered ‘heavy slap to US’s face’, says Khamenei as he threatens further attacks on American bases – as it happened
In his first comments since the ceasefire, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said the US ‘gained no achievement’ when it joined the war with Israel against TehranTom Ambrose (The Guardian)
not literally every Palestinian is a member of Hamas.
Killing civilians would still be wrong even if they were.
You say you don't understand this thinking? Well you're half way there by accepting that murdering civilians is ok if they're part of "the bad guys". The next step is just extending who counts
I can understand why they would be ok with killing members of Hamas
Then you understand why they would be ok with killing Palestinians in general.
Nobara, Garuda, Bazzite.... wait actually CachyOS and Solus
I've been using Pop!_OS for a few years now, and it's worked like a dream. Everything works out-of-the-box, and gaming on Linux has never been easier. But it almost works a little too well. Learning Linux as opposed to Windows for all my games was a fun challenge.
But, now that I'm familiar with how to set up any game that needs a little help besides Proton, I'm starting to want to delve into my OS more to see what I can customize, and I think picking a new distro with slightly different architechture will be very nice.
Don't get me wrong, I still want something that works by itself more often than not. But I would love to have something a little more cutting-edge that gives me a little more control.
I started with Linux by installing Kubuntu, and I really miss KDE Plasma. I know Kubuntu is still on Plasma 5, and I've been wanting to find a distro that lets me use Plasma 6.
I've narrowed my choices down to three distros: Nobara, Garuda, and Bazzite.
So far, I've confirmed that Nobara and Garuda come with Plasma 6, but I haven't found that information for Bazzite yet.
So, what do you think about these distros? What are the pros and cons for you?
I'm leaning the most toward Garuda - but I'm worried Arch may be TOO big of a leap. I really just learned that Fedora is not Arch-based, so I know Garuda will be a bit of the odd one out of the three.
TL;DR: Nobara, Garuda, Bazzite - which one is good and do any suck?
EDIT:
Thanks, everyone, for the insightful and helpful comments! From what everyone has said, I've come to find that either CachyOS or Solus will fit my needs best.
CachyOS seems optimized for gaming, while Solus' curated rolling releases seem (to my untrained eye at least) to be somewhat of a step between the way Debian-based distros upgrade and the way Arch-based distros upgrade.
I'd love to hear people's experiences with both of these! I think I'm going to try to dual-boot them and see what setup looks like for both.😄
like this
Endymion_Mallorn and fireshell like this.
Bazzite has the latest KDE, yeah, currently reading 6.4 on the latest version. Nobara broke on upgrades for me (I did nothing crazy, basic install and basic upgrade process), bazzite is rock solid and built on a good base (fedora atomic). In general, I fully recommend immutable atomic distros for noobies it all just works and it helps teach you important lessons on data security and containerization
The best thing about atomic linux images like Bazzite is if for whatever reason Bazzite stops releasing new versions you can rebase to a different "distro" and itll have all of your user data and configs intact with a single simple command. With things like Nobara or Garuda, if there is a problem you essentially have to do a clean install.
edit:
And as for Arch, Linux mint, etc., I personally find these distros and advice to be outdated. Upgrades can often break in many smaller linux distros and it is very important to have a strong and reproducible method of upgrading, especially for new users. VanillaOS and Fedora Atomic are currently the most user friendly ways to achieve flawless upgrades.
I was reading into atomic distros just now. Is the rebase feature the main thing that sets atomic desktops apart?
I'm not too worried about having to troubleshoot. Nobara has been appealing to me because it's developed by the Proton guy.
How does an atomic distro help teach containerization and data security as compared to a traditional distro?
Is the rebase feature the main thing that sets atomic desktops apart?
Atomic and immutable distros essentially attempt to make each version on every computer act exactly the same to help devs with debugging. This means they shut down a lot of easy access to core system files, instead you have to use special commands to layer new changes onto your distro. These are automatically re-applied every time you upgrade, reducing the chance of breakage.
Rebasing is a fun consequence of this. Fedora Atomic images (re: things like Bazzite, Secureblue, Kinoite, etc) can be swapped out with a simple command or two. If a dev does something you don't like, you can easily swap to a different image without having to do a full migration.
I’m not too worried about having to troubleshoot. Nobara has been appealing to me because it’s developed by the Proton guy.
Most of the kernel mods from nobara are applied on Bazzite. Bazzite and CachyOS afaik contribute to the same set of code there.
How does an atomic distro help teach containerization and data security as compared to a traditional distro?
Since you cannot easily modify system files, you need to use containers to make certain very technical (and often insecure) things work. DistroBox is the main method for this, and as a plus side, it lets you install programs with commands from any distro. I can use the AUR (an arch linux feature) on Bazzite (Fedora atomic) with DistroBox if i want, for example. There are some other things that come preinstalled on Bazzite that help with this, such as flathub and brew.sh
If you want to play with Atomic distros I'd recommend you do that in a virtual machine in KVM first. They are quite restricting which is good for the distro developers to make consistent releases and experiences for users, and secure, but not necessarily the best option for tech savvy users.
There are ways around the restrictions but you can reach points where the compromises you have to make are too frustrating. If you find that out late down the line after setting up your desktop it can be very annoying. Also I do use Flatpak, but it's not the most efficient way to run software. Atomic distros have more overhead due to the need to use flatpaks or distrobox and the like to get everything you might want.
Atomic distros are a neat idea but I personally love tweaking every element of my install and optimising or customising it. So I use a rolling release distro, have my home folder on a separate partition, and back up regularly.
Preface: I don't have any experience with Garuda or Nobara but I have used Bazzite.
Not to make the choice harder, but Bazzite does come with Plasma 6. You can have it boot to the SteamOS UI or to the Plasma Desktop.
Bazzite is a great choice for stability but you need to be aware it doesn't operate like a traditional Linux distribution since it's based on ostree and is immutable. Package installations are primarily done through Flatpak, AppImage or exported via Distrobox.
like this
themadcodger likes this.
like this
themadcodger likes this.
Like OP said, you can get Plasma on Bazzite, as well as install it right on a SteamDeck if you have one. It's constantly being updated, and if gaming is your main driver, Bazzite goes out of its way to make things work. In theory you wouldn't have to do any tinkering to get games running, with the added bonus that you won't be messing up or introducing any entropy to your system files. If something does go wrong, you can reboot into the previous release and it'll be back to where you just came from.
There's still plenty to learn if you want to, it's just not the traditional Linux distro setup.
Kubuntu 24.10 is on plasma 6.1; not sure why you thought it was on plasma 5? Maybe you were thinking of the Long Term Support release which has a much longer release cycle and favours stability over cutting edge; that probably is still on 5? But personally I stay away from Ubuntu distros due to snap.
If you really want to learn Linux and game, maybe pick a distro that is not optimised by default for gaming and optimise it yourself?
I'm on OpenSuSE Tunbleweed and have optimised it myself to game how I want. It's rolling release so I'm on KDE Plasma 6.4. It's not difficult to do although I haven't gone quite as far as kernel patching that the gaming focused distros offer.
Another challenge is Arch - it's really not as difficult as people think and even just setting it up in a virtual machine helps you learn alot about Linux fundamentals without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. I've learnt alot using KVM to create virtual machines, and even have a Win 11 machine set up just because I can.
Another route to consider which I also do is get a SBC like a Raspberry 5 and look into setting up self hosting of services like Home Assistant etc. Again you learn Alot about how Linux works in the process and you can keep your main PC running for games without having to move. There is a whole self hosting community on Lemmy with loads of different routes to go, and lots of different manufacturers these days.
There are lots of options beyond changing distros. But also changing distros can be fun and a nice way to reset and make something new.
I would guess jumping from PopOS to Bazzite would be a challange becaue of it is immutable base. It is supposedly less prone to brekage, but certain guides won't work on them.
I think Nobara (or Fedora KDE) will work for you to try. I would avoid Garuda. It has many GUI for helping new user but if learning is your purpose, that just gets in the way. I would suggest Endeavor OS for Arch-based distro.
This is a left field suggestion: Try Solus !solus@piefed.social , we have a pretty good KDE edition. :)
Cheers!
Thank you for that point about Bazzite. I was worried about having locked-down system files, because I'm really not at a place where I'm breaking my distro all the time.
I've been eyeing CachyOS since another user suggested it. Love the idea of rolling releases, so Solus seems cool too! What sets ya'll apart from the other distros that have been discussed?
As a tinkering old nerd who mainly runs Garuda these days, I would throw in that the added GUI tools don't have to be in the way. It is Arch under the hood, and you can totally ignore Garuda's add-ons and just proceed like you would on vanilla Arch whenever you feel like it.
Best of both worlds, really. The GUI tools are still there whenever you do want to use them, but it's also just Arch. I like MX Linux for similar reasons, as someone who started out on Debian back in the day. Useful for solving problems in both cases, too.
I think those three will be completely fine, but also I think base Arch would be completely fine for you. I have no idea why it's a meme that Arch is so "hard". I wouldn't recommend it for someone coming from Windows or Mac who has no idea what they're doing and had no poweruser tendencies on Windows/Mac either. But for someone who's used Linux for a few years, I think doing a base Arch install is no biggie at all. It's got a very annoying meme reputation but I think it's completely inaccurate.
That's an aside, and I'm not saying you should use base Arch, just that I don't think there's anything wrong with it if that's something you're interested in. Although if you're coming from a "beginner" distro and your intent is to learn, I do think doing a base Arch install (even if you don't stick with it) is a good idea. You'll be entirely capable of the install process and probably get a better understanding of how your system works. Then after you install it you can switch to some other distro you prefer.
like this
HeerlijkeDrop likes this.
So, Bazzite does have a KDE 6 variant, and works very, very well, especially on a handheld PC.
It takes the approach of sandboxing off the core OS, but giving you a bunch of tools for running flatpaks and other things, set up DistroBox to semi-sort of have multiple linux os's simultaneously if you want to say, compile something from source that only has proper dependencies figured out in... not Arch, what SteamOS is based on...
I run it on my SteamDeck because it offers more ability to use it as an actual PC, while still being rock solid in gaming mode.
But uh... for more discussion... I'm going to kind of not answer your question and suggest something else:
Check out PikaOS.
Basically, much like Nobara is a 'gaming-tuned', optimized, cutting/bleeding-edge version of Fedora...
PikaOS basically is that, but for Debian.
If you're used to using PopOS!, well, that's ultimately Debian based, so there may be less of a learning curve now that you're broadly familiar with the Debian environment.
PikaOS works with GNOME, KDE, Hyprland if you want an even lighter weight DE.
They are also working on a Handheld PC capable out of the box distro, but its not ready yet.
From what I've seen from various youtubers... PikaOS is trading blows with Cachy and Nobara for getting the highest frame rate out of a game, on a same hardware / same setting FPS comparison... sometimes it is actually beating them.
Uh also, yeah, look into CachyOS, it seems to be the latest hotness for an Arch based, gaming optimized, but widely functional for 'whatever' OS, if you're curious about trying out Arch, and of course thus being able to constantly let every one know you use Arch, actually.
But, now that I’m familiar with how to set up any game that needs a little help besides Proton, I’m starting to want to delve into my OS more to see what I can customize, and I think picking a new distro with slightly different architechture will be very nice.Don’t get me wrong, I still want something that works by itself more often than not. But I would love to have something a little more cutting-edge that gives me a little more control.
Fam, did I understand you correctly that you want to tinker/tweak/customize the system to your heart's content? Yet, you also wish that the system "just works". At least, mostly. Is that right? Or..., like could you perhaps be more clear on what it is you'd like to tinker/tweak/customize in the first place? Please, if possible, be explicit.
After I got a better idea on what it actually is that you seek, I'll try to answer your other(/remaining) questions.
I suppose that's fine, and please feel free to act however way you wish.
The fact remains, however, that no one actually delved into the essence of the matter.
Furthermore, I find it rather troublesome that you deflected the question rather than answering it head-on. Perhaps you didn't think it through yet, and are just waiting to be swayed by whoever advertises best.
To illustrate my point, would you (at least) be so kind to explain me where/why Fedora has lost your favor? While, on the other hand, what Solus provides (in contrast) to justify your interest in it?
Do you think I am using this thread and this thread alone as my only source of information on these distros? I'm crowdsourcing opinions and checking them against the documentation for the distros and my personal preferences.
I feel as though this thread has delved into the essence of the matter perfectly well. That matter being, of course, people's opinions on the three distros I laid out. I deflected your question because you are looking to pick my brain and start an in-depth discussion, but I've reached a point in my research where I'm comfortable making a choice without any more guidance.
And, well, idk, I feel like my statements indicated I was looking for a good middle ground between a stable system that works smoothly and something I can crack open and break while tweaking - for the learning experience. I suppose that would really just boil down to fixed vs rolling release distros.
Fedora has lost my favor due to being a fixed release distro. After CachyOS was brought to my attention, and I researched it a little bit, it seemed to fit my desires pretty well. It's optimized for speed, which is perfect for games, and it's rolling release so I still get to feel like an uber haxx0r. Nothing against Fedora, it seems great. I want something a little further from my comfort zone.
Solus is appealing to me because it isn't based on anything else, and I love that it's a small team. Plus, the weekly updates thing they do felt like a good middle ground between how Debian-based and Arch-based distros work in terms of updating. But, I think I'll stick with CachyOS for now, I'm excited to use Arch btw.
First of all, thank you for that response!
Do you think I am using this thread and this thread alone as my only source of information on these distros?
No, I don't think that. I'd even challenge that notion as your query didn't start with a simple "What's best?" but instead asked for a comparison between three distros that were (somehow) selected by you. Please feel free to enlighten me on what made you even consider the premise of your above question. Though, as this is not that important to begin with, it's also perfectly fine to ignore that 👍.
I feel as though this thread has delved into the essence of the matter perfectly well. That matter being, of course, people’s opinions on the three distros I laid out.
If you lay it out like that, then; yeah, surely. However, it seems we fundamentally differ on what the essence of the matter is. And, perhaps I'm at fault for thinking this is a beneficial exercise to begin with. Regardless, I feel I at least owe you an explanation that goes over where I'm coming from:
Fundamentally, literally none of your original three distros serve you well for the purposes of "I’m starting to want to delve into my OS more to see what I can customize". Each one is pretty opinionated (by default^[Garuda is exempted from this through its KDE Lite offering.]) and -heck- both Bazzite and Nobara come with (highly) specialized tools required for system maintenance. This is because they've identified that there's a very serious disconnect between the freedom they'd like to allow their users and the (otherwise almost insurmountable) complexity this adds to how upgrades are managed. Bazzite trusts Fedora Atomic's tooling for this, while .
Being (highly) opinionated isn't necessarily bad. But it's undeniably easier to tweak/tinker/configure a more minimal system. Hence, you're better served by a lean install (with sane defaults). Thankfully, community members either recognized this and tried to sway you towards other options. With success*. Or, you were able to discern distros that better serve you from the communities' input. However it may be, both CachyOS and Solus are definitely better in that regard. Though, crucially, if the community strictly kept to discussing the original three distros and didn't go out of their way to venture into unexplored waters, then you wouldn't have arrived where you are right now.
Anyhow, all of the above could as well be disregarded the very moment you (hypothetically) state that your idea of customization is limited to the avenues KDE Plasma offers. Because, the original three are perfectly suited for that. So, your ideas on what tweaking/tinkering/customization entails is fundamentally linked to the distro that's most fit for the job.
And thus, I would distill the essence of the matter to be a clear idea on what kind of balance between "stability" and "customization" is envisioned as desirable by you. And, while at it, proper delineations of what is and isn't understood as stability and customization. Is the requirement of stability only satisfied if you can easily rollback to a proper working state? Or, is borking on a random update simply unforgivable? On the other hand, do you really want to compile your own kernel and install it? Or were you merely interested in KDE's knobs? Etc. etc.
and start an in-depth discussion
Not necessarily, answering "Or…, like could you perhaps be more clear on what it is you’d like to tinker/tweak/customize in the first place?" would probably have been sufficient.
something I can crack open and break while tweaking - for the learning experience
There's so much we could go over in the paragraph the above text is found, but I'll instead limit myself to just the above text. I find myself in a conundrum when you present that the above was implied and that (somehow) you came to consider Bazzite. While Bazzite is a lot more customizable than people give it credit for, I would not describe any part of the experience as "cracking it open". So, when met with an oxymoron as such, I literally have to ask for a clarification.
Fedora has lost my favor due to being a fixed release distro.
You've stated somewhere that you "Love the idea of rolling releases". So, if Solus passes as a rolling release distro ^[To be clear, technically, it absolutely does.], but has less uptodate packages than Fedora's previous release^[So I'm not even comparing it to Fedora 42 or Fedora Rawhide (i.e. its rolling release branch).]. Then, what is it intrinsically that makes it favorable as a rolling release? And I haven't even delved into why Fedora's release cadence is referred to as semi-rolling or how the latest updates to packages like GNOME arrive earlier in Fedora compared to even Arch. Btw, this is not meant as one big advertisement for Fedora. Instead, I want to point out the many many nuances that exist within the Linux landscape.
After CachyOS was brought to my attention, and I researched it a little bit, it seemed to fit my desires pretty well. It’s optimized for speed, which is perfect for games, and it’s rolling release so I still get to feel like an uber haxx0r.But, I think I’ll stick with CachyOS for now, I’m excited to use Arch btw.
I agree that CachyOS is one of the better fits. And if you're not interested to check out Arch, EndeavourOS or openSUSE Tumbleweed(/Slowroll), then I can't even think of another rolling release worth considering for you.
I love that it’s a small team.
I don't know why this would be preferred over a big team 🤔. Mind helping me understand this?
Btw, to be clear, Solus, as a project, is currently not very healthy. While it could compete with Fedora and openSUSE in the past, the last couple of years haven't been very kind to it. I'd propose the idea that the departure of its founder (i.e. Ikey Doherty) from the project has left it (relatively) visionless. And the turbulent times that followed made nurturing its community a great challenge. One, I'd argue, they weren't able to handle gracefully. Regardless, it's undoubtedly a shell of its former glory. This is also reflected by how relatively bare-bones its repository is. Or how absent it is within the discourse. Hopefully it will be able to bounce back after goodies from Doherty's latest project (i.e. AerynOS) trinkle down to benefit Solus. But, until then, it would be very irresponsible of me if I didn't discourage you from daily-driving it...
See, this is what I meant. I deflected because my phrasing gave everyone else enough information that they could just suggest a distro.
I appreciate that you've clearly put thought into the recommendation you want to give, and I appreciate that you'd like to really understand what I'm looking for. But at the time of your original comment, CachyOS was baremetal on my machine. So, I've already picked what I want, and you're insisting I must explain in greater detail so that you may answer my question (already been answered).
Please feel free to enlighten me on what made you even consider the premise of your above question.
The fact that you were insistent no one "delved into the essence of the matter." I didn't need them to, I was researching every OS that anyone mentioned.
but instead asked for a comparison between three distros that were (somehow) selected by you.
They're all gaming distros, dude. I felt like that was evident.
I'm sorry this whole post discussion has not gone the way you wanted, but it's gone the way I wanted. And I believe I've found something that works for me.
But, in the end, it ain't Sophie's Choice. I have my important files on a thumb drive and a backup thumb drive with Pop!_OS in case I need to start fresh again. NBD.
Fam, with all due respect, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you've 'properly' engaged with my previous reply. Don't get me wrong, it's your absolute prerogative to disregard/move-on/disengage/let-go especially if you're already moved on. The daunting task to read a wall of text concerning a subject you've internally closed/'solved' ain't everyone's cup of tea anyways. The reason I've brought this up, is because most of how I would respond to your latest reply is already contained within my previous reply 😅. As such, I will refrain from reiterating what I've said before for the sake of brevity. Instead, I'll try to strictly address the unaddressed. I'll also take the liberty to assume that you're not a fan of consuming long-form content. This will also be reflected in the remainder of this reply.
my phrasing gave everyone else enough information that they could just suggest a distro
Suggesting a distro ain't hard; CTRL + click here consecutively to get a random stream of distros. Even if we would limit it to the union of gaming distros with (semi-)rolling release distros, there's a lot to choose from. As such, mentioning what's out there ain't impressive. But expertly navigating between them sure as hell is.
Granted, suggesting a (new) distro wasn't even the objective. You wanted comparisons... Or, rather, I assumed you did.
CachyOS was baremetal on my machine.
It would probably have saved us both a bunch of trouble if you had been transparent/explicit about this. I can't read your mind nor do I like to assume stuff.
but instead asked for a comparison between three distros that were (somehow) selected by you.They're all gaming distros, dude. I felt like that was evident.
Please allow me to clarify that it wasn't entirely clear why these gaming distros were specifically selected, while others like CachyOS, ChimeraOS, DraugerOS, Jovian-NixOS, PikaOS and Regata OS were not.
I'm sorry this whole post discussion has not gone the way you wanted
Fam, I got literally no stakes in this discussion. Apologies if I made you uncomfortable (or something) by making you think otherwise. I was merely in it to help/assist/support/aid you to the best of my abilities. For this, I required more input so that I wouldn't have to succumb you under multiple walls of text. I didn't think asking you to answer "could you perhaps be more clear on what it is you’d like to tinker/tweak/customize in the first place? Please, if possible, be explicit." was unreasonable. But perhaps I was wrong.
but it's gone the way I wanted. And I believe I've found something that works for me.
I sure hope so, fam. I wouldn't want to see you return with your tail between your legs.
I used Solus for years, it was actually my first long time Linux distro, and I have fond memories from that time and deep appreciation of the project. Note that I say used, because I have moved on (to EndeavourOS and later NixOS).
The reason why I moved on is the same as why I would recommend against Solus: the project have lost a lot of its core contributors. At the time I left there were no package updates for quite some time (used to be weekly).
I am not quite sure Solus really got a future. There are talks about converging it with AerynOS, former SerpentOS, which is innovative but still experimental software built by the original team, i.e. those that left Solus in the first place. Though they are really proficient in making the software, I do not think they have the same skillset for securing longevity through contributions.
In the end you should not care too much what people think. You will get the popular options for the intersection of Lemmy and Linux users, but popular is not always good nor what is right for you. Just try stuff and be ready to move a little through rigorous backups, you do have backups?
Hmm, thank you for your point about Solus. I was interested because it seemed the most interested in the desktop experience. But it does seem they're updating and getting back on track. I love the idea of a weekly rolling release for beginners who still need the idea to click.
I do have backups ;)
I don't agree with your assessment of Solus condition now. Granted I am biased as I am part of the staff. After the outage in early 2023, we have been going strong ever since. There are more contributors than ever. The bus factor problem has been mitigated by more people now have access to critical infrastructure.
Sure the old-heads are all gone but the future of Solus couldn't be more clear than right now. eopkg was ported to python3 and now it is (finally) the default. We switch installer to calamares and in process of replacing our software center. Documentation also now looks better than ever. We already shed so many technical debts that is been going on for years, long before the outage. In the future the plan is for Solus to use AerynOS tooling and on their side development is going rapidly. You can read this all about this on our blog, devlog and forum.
I wrote the monthly "Contributor Roundup" in the forum, it summaries what the contributors been doing in the month. I would say we have pretty steady contribution rate and there is always new contributor coming in. If you have not tried Solus again after the outage, please do. You might be surprised on how things have changed and hopefully for the better. If you find anything that is not good, do not hesitate to tell us. We always appreciate a constructive feedback.
Anyway cheers!
This sounds pretty exciting. Thank you so much for your continued contributions!
In the future the plan is for Solus to use AerynOS tooling and on their side development is going rapidly.
Should I interpret this as Solus going 'immutable'? Or is it something else?
I am not the technical guy, so I might explain some terminology wrong. So, I will give you a few article you can read in my answer. AerynOS tooling right now is focused on the "atomic" part, you can read about it here. The "immutable" part of the original proposition (when it is called Serpent OS) is not set in stone yet. Solus will adopt what make sense for us and right now we are very encouraged by atomic update that AerynOS tooling can already achieve.
TL;DR: Solus going immutable? No plan for it right now :)
Alright, I very much appreciate you for sharing those articles; it allows me to get into the nitty-gritty of things. Thank you!
As someone who champions the (ongoing) paradigm shift towards atomic/declarative/immutable/stateless systems, I can't but admire the effort to (IIUC):
- Have changing the base of the system without requiring a reboot as a first-class design goal that's well supported (unlike Fedora Atomic)
- Employ a hash + store system that doesn't require forsaking the FHS nor enforces a DSL (unlike NixOS)
- Accomplish the above on a long-standing independent project, so that we can (on one hand) trust the longevity of the project AND (on the other hand) know that it isn't actively resisting its upstream (unlike many other smaller projects, some of which are found here)
While glancing over the many articles, I couldn't really find anything related to declarative system management. Is this something the project intends to tackle eventually?
GitHub - Malix-Labs/Awesome-Atomic: An awesome curated knowledge-base about atomic systems
An awesome curated knowledge-base about atomic systems - Malix-Labs/Awesome-AtomicGitHub
As with many feature outlined, most things are still on drawing board and not yet realized. But yes, the declarative system management ala NixOS was being discussed. The focus now is making "Versioned Repository", so user and developer can avoid breaking changes altogether.
They just released a new blogpost if you are not aware: aerynos.com/blog/2025/06/30/mi… .
They have even weekly updates on updates. Really great comminication towards users.
Andurand Hedge Fund’s Losses Worsen to 60% as Turmoil Spreads
Andurand Hedge Fund’s Losses Worsen to 60% as Turmoil Spreads
Hedge fund manager Pierre Andurand’s losing streak continued in June as geopolitical turbulence unsettled commodity markets.Saijel Kishan (Bloomberg)
Scientists in China have developed the world’s first 3D model of early mouse embryos, revealing how life forms in its initial stages at single-cell resolution.
Digital embryo gives China a powerful tool to decode the secret of life: scientists
The world-first scientific breakthrough will enhance understanding of disease development, organ regeneration and cancer treatment.Holly Chik (South China Morning Post)
like this
k_rol, Cowbee [he/they], artifex, ephrin, Ramen 🍜(she/her), SpeedRunner, anarchoilluminati [comrade/them], HyonoKo, AdeptusPrimaris, Mohamed and adhocfungus like this.
don't like this
spechter doesn't like this.
China debuts new generation of self-developed, fully controllable server processor chips
China debuts new generation of self-developed, fully controllable server processor chips
Chinese company Loongson Technology released a new generation of domestically developed processor chips for general-purpose central processing units (CPUs), named 3C6000, on Thursday, a step forward to enter the new era of artificial intelligence (AI…www.globaltimes.cn
SemiDrive to supply cockpit chips in European EVs as Chinese firms go global
Exclusive | SemiDrive to supply EV cockpit chips to European carmaker as Chinese firms go global
‘Striving to be a top global chip supplier, we need to expand from the China market to the global market,’ general manager Eugene Wang says.Yujie Xue (South China Morning Post)
Trump ends all U.S. trade talks with Canada over digital services tax
Trump ends all U.S. trade talks with Canada over digital services tax
Trump's announcement on Truth Social accused Canada of "copying the European Union" with the "egregious" tax.Kevin Breuninger (CNBC)
Open source model that does photoshop-grade edits without affecting the rest of the pic: OmniGen 2
GitHub - VectorSpaceLab/OmniGen2: OmniGen2: Exploration to Advanced Multimodal Generation.
OmniGen2: Exploration to Advanced Multimodal Generation. - VectorSpaceLab/OmniGen2GitHub
Russia seeks successful completion of special military operation — Putin
Russia seeks successful completion of special military operation — Putin
The Russian president also denied any aggressive plans with regard to Europe and NATO countriesTASS
Dessalines likes this.
Dessalines doesn't like this.
I'll do one better and have the last chief of NATO explain it for you:
The background was that President Putin declared in the autumn of 2021, and actually sent a draft treaty that they wanted NATO to sign, to promise no more NATO enlargement. That was what he sent us. And was a pre-condition for not invade Ukraine. Of course we didn't sign that.The opposite happened. He wanted us to sign that promise, never to enlarge NATO. He wanted us to remove our military infrastructure in all Allies that have joined NATO since 1997, meaning half of NATO, all the Central and Eastern Europe, we should remove NATO from that part of our Alliance, introducing some kind of B, or second class membership. We rejected that.
So he went to war to prevent NATO, more NATO, close to his borders.
nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinion…
Hope that clears things up for you.
Dessalines likes this.
No, you aren’t hallucinating, the corporate plan for AI is dangerous
No, you aren’t hallucinating, the corporate plan for AI is dangerous
Big tech is working hard to sell us on artificial intelligence, in particular what is called “artificial general intelligence.” At conferences and in interviews corporate leaders describe a n…Reports from the Economic Front
This is the simple solution proposed by Geoffrey Hinton, a computer scientist, cognitive scientist, cognitive psychologist, and Nobel laureate in physics.
like this
ElcaineVolta, Badabinski and HeerlijkeDrop like this.
like this
warm likes this.
like this
warm likes this.
There's also no css and no html clubs.
Last but not least, take a look at gemini protocol, which is a bit like gopher: lightweight and textbased only
like this
warm likes this.
Over the past few posts I’ve set up a Windows VM with USB passthrough, and attempted to reverse-engineer the official drivers, As I was doing that, I also thought I’d message the vendor and ask them if they could share any specifications or docs regarding their protocol. To my surprise, Nanoleaf tech support responded to me within 4 hours, with a full description of the protocol that’s used both by the Desk Dock as well as their RGB strips.
To my surprise, Nanoleaf tech support responded to me within 4 hours, with a full description of the protocol that’s used both by the Desk Dock as well as their RGB strips. The docs mostly confirmed what I had already discovered independently, but there were a couple of other minor features as well (like power and brightness management) that I did not know about, which was helpful.
Combo of investigating and a foot up from the manufacturer.
When I've done this in the past for game controllers I've not received such an emphatic response (other than when I was working for the vendor).
Did get some via FOI for a few other products though.
When I installed Ubuntu on an HP laptop recently, I got a message that I didn't have the drivers for my internal Intel wireless chip. It was at this point that I realized the laptop also didn't have an Ethernet port. The installer told me to put the drivers on a flashdrive. Thankfully the error spelled out enough for me to find the drivers online. There were a few different versions and I put them all on the stick.
Bluetooth didn't work, but I realized that was fixed by just enabling the service with systemctl.
Trivia you can use to woo potential partners
Here’s 443 pages on generic HID implementations.
My pants!
If you're not already aware of it (I wasn't until recently) there's a search engine that "prioritizes non-corporate content": marginalia-search.com/
I couldn't find this particular article or blog there, I'm not sure why. Perhaps their robots.txt blocks it, which would be unfortunate. It turns up other similar content though.
Marginalia Search Engine - Marginalia Search
Marginalia Search is a small independent do-it-yourself search engine for surprising but content-rich websites that never ask you to accept cookies or subscribe to newsletters.Marginalia Search
Shit... kind of makes me want to learn Rust now!
Anyway, wonderful write up. No BS, both shortcuts if you just want to the code and in depth links e.g. beyondlogic.org/usbnutshell/us… all written with a fun tone. Plenty of actually useful content showing us all that sure, it is not trivial to write a (USB) driver but it is also probably not as hard as we imagine. Particularly enjoyed the :
- userspace driver, namely being able to tinker locally without feel the pressure to push back the work to Linux the kernel itself
libusband other drivers, namely that there is a myriad of points to start from already, not just writing reverse engineering bits in memory to the new device and hoping it'll work
USB in a NutShell - Chapter 1 - Introduction
Introduces the Universal Serial Bus covering the various chapters of the spec and what is required to be read.www.beyondlogic.org
NATO members’ leaders snubbing Zelensky at key summit – Orban
NATO members’ leaders snubbing Zelensky at key summit – Orban
Hungary, the US, Türkiye, and Slovakia are among countries that don’t want to engage the Ukrainian leader, the PM has saidRT
Because having access to both sides is better than being forcefed the pure unadulterated truth of White House propaganda and Trump's truthsocial posts.
Oh wait, westies do that logic juggling where somehow it's just the president and his party that are liars but that is somehow not systemic and not propaganda because it's their side doing it lol.
It's clearly corporatuons who bought the election. Onve the Citizens United ruling came down, it was just a matter of time.
Capitalism poisons everything.
I know the moon landing was real because I can prove it happened.
Don't be an ass.
That's called sarcasm and you can't prove that Putin is controlling any western politicians anymore than the qanon magas can prove that Biden stole the 2020 elections. You're both conspiracy theorists and the dems in particular are complete parrots of the Clintonite neocon neointerventionist warhawks that have been pushing a new cold and even hot war against Russia in their own sphere of influence to prevent a multipolar world.
You seriously need to touch grass.
I'm not a dem. I want to see the whole corrupt system fall.
You seriously need to touch grass.
I do. I'm constantly outside for work, hunting, or pleasure.
Judge Backs Anthropic’s Book Use as Fair, Piracy Trial Still Looms
Judge Backs Anthropic’s Book Use as Fair, Piracy Trial Still Looms
A U.S. judge rules Anthropic’s AI training use of copyrighted books is fair use, despite piracy concerns. Authors push back as legal battle continues.GazeOn Team (GazeOn)
Explainable AI (XAI), Decoded: What It Is, Why It Matters, and Where It Fails
Explainable AI (XAI), Decoded: What It Is, Why It Matters, and Where It Fails
Imagine being denied a loan or misdiagnosed by a medical AI — and no one, not even the developers, can explain why it happened. For years, AI systems have operated behind closed doors: powerful but opaque, trusted but misunderstood.Eli Grid (GazeOn)
anon5621
in reply to JustOneMoreCat • • •HelloRoot
in reply to JustOneMoreCat • • •glitching
in reply to JustOneMoreCat • • •milk
in reply to glitching • • •