Regardless of the reason, the end result is still the same, which is that new users are left with the idea that terminal is essential for using Linux.
You can say that you set up a distro without using terminal all you want, but as long as new users don’t know how to do that, my point still stands. Frankly, the fact that you even thought to bring up that point feels like, to me, extra proof that experienced users are highly dismissive of the new user experience.
I mainly play indie titles, but actually zero times so far. Steam really does everything for you nowadays
As a recent Linux user, I can say that he’s got a point, but he’s making the wrong point. What I’ve learned is that technically, you don’t have to use terminal. But as a new user, you’re never made aware that there are non-terminals options. Every time you try installing a program or really doing anything, the first response on any article or forum is generally going to be to open up terminal and start typing. Linux is in a weird spot because the are so many desktop environments that the only way to make a tutorial that works on all distributions is to tell the user to use terminal. Yet by doing so, you are pushing away new users who will begin to think that Linux is too technical for normal use.
I see many experienced users dismiss new users’ concerns because “you don’t actually need terminal,” but I don’t think these people really understand that while that’s technically true, the new user experience has been constant tutorials and articles that basically state the exact opposite. I’m not sure what a good solution would be, but I do think that experienced users need to acknowledge that just because new users identify an incorrect problem, doesn’t mean that there isn’t a problem at all
The biggest difficulty with answering this question I think is that I don’t know how broad the categories should be. Do you have an estimate of how many categories you’re looking for?
Well, I’m just covering my bases. I can’t personally imagine an instance in which it would be helpful, but human nature (and especially human nature of children) can be really hard to predict and I won’t deny that I might have missed a case in which it could be helpful.
My upbringing was extremely “do what you want, but deal with the consequences.”
“You can watch an R-rated horror movie, but don’t come to me if you can’t sleep at night”-type of situation.
My impression has generally been that my freedom to do what I want let me learn a lot about decision making, responsibility, curiosity, and modern survival skills like Googling things. I’m genuinely baffled by how poorly some people my age use the computer and find things on Google, and I somewhat suspect many of them probably simply haven’t had the opportunity to explore technology on their own. And a lot of my hobbies were developed exactly because I allowed to do what I wanted when I was a child.
As for children doing stupid shit and searching up things that aren’t appropriate for their age, my thought has generally been, why is it the parent’s role to keep that from the child? I strongly believe that a parent’s role is to prepare the child to be a functional adult, not to baby them.
I acknowledge that all children are different, and perhaps there are some cases in which having parental controls would help. But I think my life would be duller if I were raised with parental controls.
Edit: having read some of the other comments, I think there’s 2 aspects to the question of parental control. The first is the aspect of children learning about age-inappropriate things, which I’ve mainly been focusing on. The other is the aspect of discipline and management (ie, preventing your children from spending 12 hours on YouTube). I think people have made interesting points about this aspect, and I respect their opinions. I personally agree with BananaKing’s take that parental controls is the wrong tool for the job. Train your children properly and you shouldn’t need to use parental controls to control their screen time.
My partner recently shared a video/clip about the differences between the way girls do makeup to attract guys vs the way girls do makeup to attract girls. What your comment reads like to me is that she put on the light makeup because she figured you would like that, but now, she’s figured that there’s no need to attract you with her makeup anymore
No makeup at all for me. I know that some women have a “no makeup” makeup, the kind where you say you don’t have any but you actually do. I don’t like that either. (she thought that I couldn’t tell)
One of my cats love fishing used tea leaves out from mugs. She doesn’t eat them, she just paws the leaves out from the cups and then leaves them on the counter. We have no idea why she does it but she absolutely insists on doing it. No other cat does this.
Describing my job? Yeah, sure. I do science.
Explaining my job? Hell no. Nobody is willing to read a 20 page lit review to start to understand the background of what I do
It’s implied that in the process of trying to warn people about covid, she inadvertently caused 9/11
If there was something I give up on, it’s gun control. For several reasons:
A meme or post that has no deeper meaning. If you have to analyze it or think about it, you’re already past a shitpost. The point of a shitpost is the stupidity of its superficial, useless, low-quality humor
It’s possible to have a high-quality, high-effort shitpost, but it’s rare, since by nature, high effort posts tend to also be meaningful. In my eyes, this is peak high effort shitpost
I’m unsure what the game is supposed to be - is it just a collection of different versions of Tetris?
Yup, thanks! I was trying to figure out which word I was thinking of. I must have malaphored myself
Same for me, but with Tetris. I’m not the best, but I’m confident I can handedly beat the vast majority of the population. I spent most of my lockdown days just doing Tetris.
I would like one too, if possible. Thanks ahead
I liked Noroi: The Curse.
No jumpscares, but really quite unsettling
Honestly, steam deck lol
It’s an odd form factor that people don’t really have much experience with, hence they don’t really know how useful it’ll be to them. To be fair to myself, I had been holding back on purchasing one until maybe a year after the initial launch, so I think I would personally describe my experience as a leap of faith.
In any case, it turns out to be a great little thing. There’s a lot of games in my backlog that don’t feel “desktop-y,” and therefore I’ve never played them, if that makes sense. But with a handheld form factor, now I have more motivation to go through those games. Emulation on the steam deck has also been great, for a similar reason. And sometimes I just want to be in bed than on my desktop. Or sometimes I’m just on the bus or waiting for something.
I think SteamOS also taught me how usable Linux was, and that’s been pretty instrumental in getting me to minimize my Windows dependence
I think having higher frame rates isn’t necessarily about whether our eyes can perceive the frame or not. As another commenter pointed out there’s latency benefits, but also, the frame rate affects how things smear and ghost as you move them around quickly. I don’t just mean in gaming. Actually, it’s more obvious when you’re just reading an article or writing something in Word. If you scroll quickly, the words blur and jitter more at low frame rates, and this is absolutely something you can notice. You might not be able to tell the frametime, but you can notice that a word is here one moment and next thing you know, it teleported 1 cm off