Linux is as good as Linux is, just as Windows is as good as Windows is and MacOS is as good as it is.

All operating systems have their place, purpose, and use cases, so the question is subjective. Different OS’s are good or bad for different people, and different scenario’s which is why they all have a part of the market share.

MacOS has ease of use and excellent intercompatibility with other Apple products, and Windows has boatloads of compatible software and compatibility with Microsoft’s Active Directory domains in businesses.

What Linux has is cost effectiveness and true ownership and control.

At the moment most people prefer ease of use for home computing, but on a long enough timeline Linux will obtain this as well, just look at what Valve did with SteamOS and the steam deck when it comes to that. Making it easy to use there is, I suspect, one of the major reasons the steam deck as a device is so well reviewed, and partly why we have seen such an increase in market share recently I suspect.

So right now, most people probably prefer another OS because of ease of use, but at some point in the future, Linux will probably be holding all the cards. It just seems that those who develop the distributions are often tied up with other goals apart from ease of use for the common user in the contemporary, but eventually they will begin to tackle this goal as well.

Lawbreakers came out ~7 years ago and it was too late to get in on the genre then.

Relevant video:

https://piped.video/watch?v=wJ4v2LgVlEA

The character roster for this game looks so generic and boring.

https://dotesports.com/concord/news/all-concord-characters-every-freerunner-weapon-ability-and-crew-bonus

You have the choice of:

-Cylindrical yellow robot (arguably this is the most original and interesting design)

-Woman with puffy sleeves

-Woman with box on head

-Man with goggles and winter jacket

-Old Woman

-Woman with pauldrons

-Generic Woman

-Green woman with ears

-Man with hat

-Pink robot

-Mushroom

-Green man with shit on arms

-Woman with sphere on head

-Blue and Red man

-Generic Man

-Generic Woman 2

Like, I’ve hardly played overwatch but at least I can tell from afar what most of the characters do from looking at them. Clearly, in overwatch, Giant knight with hammer is a melee tank, clearly the ninja guy with the sword is mobile and and has some melee ability, clearly the lady with the sniper rifle is a sniper, clearly the angel is a healer, clearly, the lady with the jetpack can fly and is support, etc.

Applying this logic to concord, the BEST I can guess is that Woman with pauldrons is a tank, otherwise the design is so ass, I really can’t even tell.

Get a design department and/or let them do their job Sony.

Downloaded because of this post, it is very good!

People like Arch because to many it feels more truly like your system than other distributions.

It isn’t that Arch is in some way more customizable than other distros, rather it’s that if there is a package on your Arch system, its probably there because it was your choice to put it there in the first place, and so the system can feel more representative of you given it only contains the things you want or need and nothing more from the get go.

What evidence is there that they don’t? If it’s because you don’t see people talking about shooting guns and wrastlin’ cattle in the Linux forums you visit, perhaps you have formed some stereotypes of people that you shouldn’t have.

I didn’t know this about Joplin, that’s pretty neat.

Then invent the technology that makes what you want to do reasonable, otherwise don’t blame a drill for being incapable of hammering nails fast enough for you.

if your point is “No one wants a digital console”, then no, you are wrong.

Nothing of the sort, it was a legitimate question in which I didn’t intend to make a statement out of subtext.

Thanks for answering it.

What the fuck is the selling point? Less features for a color??

Yeahhhhh, I don’t want a company which itself previously settled for a hundred million dollars in a gender discrimination suit to have every persons intimate personal data.

I think both of you are in more agreement than opposition.

Perhaps consider investing in a small UPS device as well, it might help out in any future events like this.

No, but arguably anyone driving a car is.

So the debate is about what words mean, but when asked to examine what any dictionary defines those words as to understand and agree upon their meanings, you fold immediately?

If the debate was about this, and I offered this to you, then if we follow your anecdote, it was actually me who lead you to the pacific ocean but then you decided to sit on the beach instead of swimming.

I guess you don’t believe your argument is predicated on facts in that case since you dropped it the moment you were faced with scrutinizing it against a reputable source.

Goodbye.

Go through a dictionary of your choosing and post the cited definitions of:

Ad hominem

Character

Attribute

Idea

Attack

Stupid

Intelligence

And I’ll prove to you by your own cited definitions why you’re wrong without going outside of the definitions.

I trust Merriam Webster if you do.

You know what? That is actually some sound reasoning and I think that is an acceptable response.

I intended my original comment to be more a a shot at google than yourself, but I can see why you came back with what you said as a result, and then I got salty about it so I apologize.

Please go ahead and explain what the difference is between calling a person stupid and calling a persons ideas stupid, given stupidity refers to a persons intelligence by definition.

If you call someone’s idea stupid, then by definition, you are calling them stupid by extension because that’s what that word means.

If used in a colloquial manner I can understand how referring to someone’s socks, or a device, or some inanimate object can allow one to call those things “stupid”, but the fact of the matter is that referring to ones ideas as stupid is redundant to calling the person stupid directly because they both refer to the intelligence and original thoughts of a person and therefore literally mean the same thing by definition.

Furthermore, the notion that saying for example “Your shirt is stupid” or “Your idea is stupid” or “your feelings are stupid” instead of “You are stupid” is not ad hominem due to the colloquial usage is laughable as a fallacious argument only needs to attack the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person rather than attacking the substance of the argument to be considered ad hominem, and if a persons ideas are not considered an attribute of them, I don’t know what is.

I think I’m pretty brushed up on how this works, but perhaps you should take your own advice, thanks.

Astounding, apparently you can counter the findings of this paper which proves beyond reasonable doubt that google is progressively getting worse when it comes to returning reliable and accurate search engine results.

https://downloads.webis.de/publications/papers/bevendorff_2024a.pdf?ref=404media.co

I’m sure the scientific community would be really glad to see the evidence you have to the contrary, I’ll even peer review your paper for you, let me know when you have a draft ready.

If it provably disabled all functionality and features of the AI, then I would find that acceptable.