pixelscript

There are exactly three kinds of manpages:

1. Way too detailed
2. Not nearly detailed enough
3. There is no manpage

I will take 1 any day over 2 or 3. Sometimes I even need 1, so I'm grateful for them.

But holy goddamn is it awful when I just want to use a command for aguably its most common use case and the flag or option for that is lost in a crowd of 30 other switches or buried under some modal subcommand. grep helps if you already know the switch, which isn't always.

You could argue commands like this don't have "arguably most common usecases", so manpages should be completely neutral on singling out examples. But I think the existence of tl;dr is the counterargument.

Tangent complaint: I thought the Unix philosophy was "do one thing, and do it well"? Why then do so many of these shell commands have a billion options? Mostly /s but sometimes it's flustering.

Acid rain is real. So is quicksand. Either of them being common and severe hazards experienced across the entire US (and maybe elsewhere, I don't know what the rest of you were taught in gradeschool), not really.

Real acid rain causes mass ecological damage through relatively subtle increases in acidity over several exposures. The way we learned about it in school, whether they meant to or not, came across like concentrated hydrochloric acid was going to rain from the skies and melt human flesh on contact.

Don't forget how to put yourself out if you spontaneously combust, and acid rain.

I drive Linux for a similar reason to why some people prefer driving manual transmission cars to automatics.

Automatic transmission cars are ideal for a certain kind of driver that has no interest in how the machine actually works, they just want the machine to do its job as smoothly as possible without them having to think about it. Not bothering with the details is the whole point.

For those of us who do have an interest in knowing how the vehicle works, automatics become kind of suffocating. They're designed to only ever behave in certain specific ways. If there's a weird niche thing that we know is possible for the machine to do with manual control, but the automatic system doesn't support, you're just SOL. You can't. This starts coming up in all sorts of annoying little ways, increasing in frequency as your knowledge increases. Death of a thousand cuts. You start feeling like you're not really driving this car, you're being taken for a ride.

Windows is like the automatic. It is a black box designed to allow people who don't care how the computer works to use the computer. To prevent morons from breaking the internal components, they put up barriers around everything and tell you to keep out.

Linux is like the manual. Yes, it does demand more finesse and active knowledge about how the computer works to drive properly. But you're in maximum control of it. If you want to pop the hood and tinker with every facet of its innards for whatever reason, it does not attempt to stop you. It's all open, laid bare for you to do whatever you want with it.

Linux has a lot of options available to make it more automatic like Windows, if you want it. The difference is that the automatic-ness is completely optional in Linux. Imagine a car that can be automatic most of the time when you don't care, but can become manual at the drop of a hat when you need it. Linux can be that if you want it to be. Windows can't.

Abolish political parties.

I'm very curious to know how exactly you want to word this law to acheive the effect you're dreaming of without it being unenforceable, without it being weaponizeable as a mass voter suppression tool, and without creating a freedom of speech or freedom of assembly violation.

A fair voting system allows people to vote for whatever reason they want. Voters want to win. Banding together to focus and force multiply campaign resources increases chances to win. Political parties are an inevitability in a fair system.

I understand the vibe of your sentiment is to not allow political parties to grow to the overcentralizing control they have today. You're not particularly concerned about, say, a band of guys who meet up at the pub to figure out who they're gonna organize a collective vote for. At least I hope not, because the alternative sounds wildly dystopian. But like, what's the line in the sand between the two? How do you define the difference, legally?

The meme format implies she catfished you with the promise of "Netflix and chill" at her house only to pull a gun on you.

In particular, she wants you to review and merge that goddamn pull request she made to your open source project repo two months ago that finally fixes that one really annoying bug.

It's speculated that the patent in question (or one of) is one that essentially protects the gameplay loop of Pokémon Legends Arceus.

https://ipforce.jp/patent-jp-P_B1-7545191

Running the first claim of the invention through Google Translate yields this massive run-on sentence description:

The computer causes a player character in a virtual space to take a stance to release a capture item when a first category group including a plurality of types of capture items for capturing a field character placed on a field in a virtual space is selected based on an operation input of pressing an operation button, and causes a player character in the virtual space to take a stance to release the capture item when a second category group including a plurality of types of combat characters that engage in combat is selected, and determines an aiming direction in the virtual space based on a directional input, and further selects the capture item included in the first category group when the first category group is selected, and the combat character included in the second category group when the second category group is selected, based on an operation input using an operation button different from the operation button , and causes the player character in the virtual space to take a stance to release the capture item when a first category group including a plurality of types of capture items for capturing a field character placed on a field in a virtual space is selected, and determines an aiming direction in the virtual space based on an operation input using an operation button different from the operation button, A game program which, based on an operation input of releasing the operation button pressed when having the player character perform an action, has the player character perform an action of releasing the selected capture item in the aiming direction if the capture item is selected, and has the player character perform an action of releasing the selected combat character in the aiming direction if the combat character is selected, and when the capture item is released and hits the field character, makes a capture success determination as to whether the capture is successful, and when the capture success determination is judged to be positive, sets the field character hit by the capture item to a state where it is owned by the player, and when the combat character is released to a location where it can fight with the field character, starts a fight on the field between the combat character and the field character.

Essentially, Nintendo has a patent on video games that involve throwing a capsule device at characters in a virtual space to capture them and initiate battle with them. In other words, they have a patent on the concept of Poké Balls (as they appear and function in Legends Arceus, specifically).

Palworld has "Pal Spheres", which are basically just Poké Balls with barely legally distinct naming.

If this sounds like an unfairly broad thing for Nintendo to have a patent on, I'm not so sure I agree. It's not like they're trying to enforce a blanket patent on all creature collectors. Just the concept of characters physically throwing capsule devices at creatures.

If you think about it, that's kind of the one thing that sets Pokémon apart from others in the genre. If there's anything to be protected, that's it. It's literally what Pokémon is named after--you put the monster in your pocket, using the capsule you threw at it.

Palworld could have easily dodged this bullet. They claim they aren't inspired by Pokémon, and that they're instead inspired by Ark: Survival Evolved. Funny, then, that Ark doesn't have throwable capsules, yet Palworld decided to add them. I'm not sure I buy their statement. And if this is indeed the patent being violated, I don't think a court will buy it either.

I'm not trying to be a Pokémon apologist here. I want Palworld to succeed and give Pokémon a run for its money. But looking at the evidence, it's clear to me Pocketpair flew a little too close to the sun here. And they're kind of idiots for it.

I'm just surprised they aren't getting nailed for the alleged blatant asset theft.

The primary thing I hate about them is that every snap package appears to your system as a separate mounted filesystem. So if you look in your file explorer, you can potentially see dozens of phantom drives clogging up your sidebar.

Debian Testing.

Learning about the xz backdoor was a fun week.

"Stop doing what I told you to do and start doing what I want you to do!" has been uttered in my office a few times.

I'm a software developer. My default explanation to people who don't know what that means is, "I whisper to computers, and sometimes they do what I ask".

Either:

• continuing to languish in obscurity with its rough-around-the-edges UX that fails to draw in anyone except self-sufficient computer savvy types who smugly proclaim they like it that way while impatiently tapping their feet and glancing at their wristwatches waiting for mainstream socials to collapse already, or
• wildly thriving, but dominated by an oligopoly of major breakout platforms that dominate the rest of the ecosystem, subtly altering it over the course of many small, tolerable nudges to the point that it hardly resemble what anyone who is currently here liked about it in the first place.

My money is on the former.