I must be clear that the problem is not that it rakes time to do the things if you have the right recipe to do them. It takes time to find it when you make a mistake.

The good way is simple: you need a system that’s well updated, so debian stable is not ideal and that was my first mistake. You need to use Proton on steam, or heroic game launcher for gog. And that’s it.

The setup for these things is straightforward, simply follow a guide for your OS.

Things got better and better in the last 2 years, and they’re still improving. I would argue that today Windows is not better. People learned how to install graphic drivers on windows, and any setup on Linux now is not harder than that.

Windows forced me to update to a version that has advertisement in it. It has built in network calls in the start menu. I would have to pay a licence and make an account, something I avoided for years. Sharing file on a private network is insanely hard to do and very buggy.

Now I’m not a Windows admin, but I’m a Linux admin, so there are many, many things I know how to do on Linux and not on Windows.

This made me realize that there is a bias: when something doesn’t work on windows, the something doesn’t work, or you only need to find how to hack it to work. But when something doesn’t work on Linux, it’s Linux that doesn’t work. That’s a double standard. The same kind of work or problems on Windows is ignored.

There are so many things today to help people use Windows, like classes, professionals, help desk, it’s everywhere, for everyone, yet it’s somehow considered easy to use windows. BTW any organisation that made the move did saw it happen. I mean that many organisations moved to Linux and gave the support and formation for it to work, and it worked.

My brother, who want nothing to do with computers if he can, asked me to install Linux on his domestic laptop. It’s not an everyone is doing it yet, but there’s definitely something.

Forcing everyone to stay connected will make pirating it harder, and that will drive many, many people away.

Playing on Linux for a year now. I wouldn’t say it was flawless, but a lot has to do with me learning how to do it correctly. Like using steam and heroic game launcher, trying a different version of Proton or wine, and it’s beginning to be very easy now that I have the right recipe so to say.

Yes very much.

My point is the exact opposite. The smiley face is to point the hypocrisy of making the loss of 3 abrams something meaningful when Russia lost far, far more.

What proportions of its planes did Russia lost? Of its warships? Of its tanks? :-)

And you define “satisfying” as “that one shot anything and trivialise everything”?

What I read is “boohoo the game is too hard for me”

They worked hard for decades. They’ve been betrayed and hampered by editors in the past until kick-started. It’s not a lucky situation, they built this luck.

Act 3 is great. It was tougher on the hardware for performances because it’s so big, but patches fixed many of these problems. That was some time ago already.

Going that way, there’s no reason to completely lose a fight in BG3. You can flee and resurrect everyone, unlike in most tabletop games.

Which leads to what I was saying : if tpk is the doing of the party, through its decisions, carelessness and/or poor play, they deserve to die.

It’s not a good dm that fudge rolls and adjust difficulty. It’s a dm you like. And it’s a game you like.

It’s Remote Desktop Protocol. A Microsoft protocol for taking controle of a remote (Windows) computer.

“something as simple as RDP” haha hahaha you’re a funny one!

My recent experience with helping a friend with an nvidia card to work on Linux is that I never want to touch an nvidia card again.

Also, please tell me which average user makes its own windows installation. When I was young in the 90s I was paid to install windows in my village.

But yes, much progress is still needed to smooth the installation. The problem is that the hardware is often a fault though, through their shitty drivers.

No one needs office unless the company forces it.

The technology required to make a modern computer is, to say the least, not easily accessible. There are very few places we’re chips are made. A handful on the planet. I mean in large quantities.

Otherwise you have laboratories mostly that have the tools to make the chips.

It is technically possible to make a free computer. But it will be much more expensive and much worse. So why bother?

Moor law is dead for a few years now. It’s a fact. It doesn’t mean performances stoped increasing. But they don’t follow the old law. That’s why the industry is shifting to distributed networking.

None of those are major breakthrough. They’re more computing power. It’s still the same technology.

Today llm are the prime candidate for a breakthrough. They still have to prove themselves though, to prove that they’re not just a fancy expensive useless toy like the blockchain.

Risc-v is not meant to be a breakthrough. It’s an evolution.

Internet was a breakthrough. The invention of the mouse was a breakthrough.

Increase in power or in disk space, new languages or os, none of those are breakthroughs. None of those changed how computer programs were made or used.

The smartphone is a significant thing. Wi-Fi is not really important though, because you don’t do anything more with WiFi than you can do with ethernet. The smartphone though and its network, that is a big thing.

There is a lot of fake progress. In computer technology some things were refined, but the only true technological novelty these last 20 years was the containerization. And maybe AI. Internet was the previous jump, but it’s not really a computer technology, and it affect much, much more than that.

And Moor law has already ended some years ago.