Hamartiogonic

What about the people who already have many computers for other purposes, and they just don’t feel like using the gaming machine for any of the purposes. What if they already get to tinker and tweak the other computers to such an extent that there’s no need for them to do any of that with the gaming system.

It’s Fedora for gamers.

It’s a CPU thing. Most games tend to require lots of GPU and very little CPU. Compiling shaders during runtime is usually fine.

I think mine was on by default. It maxes out the CPU for several seconds.

Why do you ask? Did you find something interesting?

Hard to tell. However, I can tell you that I don’t miss my 4060 at all. My current AMD card works flawlessly in Bazzite. Didn’t need to figure out any workarounds, trickery or hackery.

But sticking with nvidia will cost you your sanity. Besides, switching doesn’t have to be super expensive if you get a used card.

That’s the one. Thanks!

What’s the name of that method where you post the wrong answer and wait for the thousand corrections to roll in? There’s gotta be an xkcd for that as well.

Even bigger than these?

• Yes, I’ve read the agreement, and
• I totally agree to all of it.
• I’m also over 18, pinky promise. 💖
• Also, remember me so that I don’t have to type my password again next week when I log in.

The tech industry is built on so many lies.

You could try these:
!linux4noobs@programming.dev
!linuxquestions@lemmy.zip

The power efficiency difference between x86 and ARM boils down to legacy baggage in the instruction set. ARM doesn’t suffer from that baggage, and that’s why Apple was able to make their chips so efficient.

GPUs are a different story though, and I don’t even know how you would compare the here. Maybe the voltage difference could explain some of that power efficiency gap.

How can you know why that is? Looks like technological limitations and diminishing gains to me.

Docker would be the sensible approach.

Imagine if the new version of some package is only compatible with the old version of PHP, but now Arch is using the new one. The admin would have to keep the old version of PHP until the devs of that other package release an update. I recall reading something about pacman not supporting partial upgrades like that.

LOL. Same.

Every now and then I find a comment where someone who clearly knows what they’re doing is deploying an Arch server in a work setting. Feeling confident with that decision takes something I don’t have. Maybe it’s experience, knowledge or something.

As a lazy admin of my own computer, I agree… for the most part. Running Debian allows you to be super lazy, whereas Arch will punish you for that. One update screwed up my GRUB because I didn’t bother reading the news. Totally my fault, learned my lesson.

This means that running Arch comes with some responsibilities that a super lazy Debian admin can simply ignore. Just read the announcements before updating and you’re good. Ignore them at your own peril.

It wasn’t a total disaster though. Just needed to fix my stupid mistake with chroot, and the system was up and running in about half an hour. Debian admins don’t end up with situations like that by being lazy. You would need to be actively trying to break your system to have to pay a price like this.

Other than that, my system has been running smoothly with hardly any interference on my part. The joy of a rolling release…

Makes me wonder how many false positives and negatives this system has. If it were a diagnostic test, people would be talking about sensitivity and specificity. Same calculations apply here as well.

This is a tricky argument to make. Living under capitalism means you don’t really have much of a choice in the matter. If you could easily choose not to participate, it would become an ethical decision.

Currently, LLMs don’t really occupy that position, but soon they will. Eventually, choosing not to use an LLM will be like choosing not to use electricity today. You may not like how your electricity was made, but can you realistically choose not to use it? Most people can’t be expected to make such radical decisions based on ethical questions, because doing so would require significant sacrifices. Same with capitalism today.

Today, you can still choose to avoid LLMs, and it won’t involve massive sacrifices on your part. I wonder how long that still holds true. Regardless, I still approve of your argument, because of the trajectory we’re currently on.

Sounds like this could be a blog post. I would really like to read about those experiences. If you have the time, please elaborate.

If we assume that Claude has free rein, the quality of rsync will fall. Now the real question is: Can we realistically assume that?

What if there is a human in the loop who has decades of experience, is more than qualified to evaluate the quality of the code, spends time reviewing it, finds stupid nonsense and fixes it. You could either fix it manually or tell Claude to fix it, which results in a few more coding and review iterations until the code is good enough. If the human in the loop is a responsible person, I think it’s fair to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Is that too much to ask? Not every application is developed and maintained by a lazy idiot with the programming skills and attention span of a toddler. There are serious and skilled people out there who use LLMs responsibly.