Some people find a duty to ignore senseless rules.
If Debian wants to make the LLM thing good, sue the providers for a billion or two for copyright violation, and join a class action to do some ASCAP style thing routing their money back to copyright holders. Separately, lobby to regulate data center build outs to include the solar and battery they need, and not be built in water stressed areas or near people who object. And understand the trillions thing is quite likely a dotcom style over investment and will vaporize in the next few years when all these pools of capital are either regulated or more likely off to ruin some other sector with too much money.
It's strange we're complaining about too much investment. The reason we avoid deflation is because it hinders investment, but perhaps it's time for a bit less money creation and have a period of deflation, even if it makes the "growth" figures look bad.
It ruined my nice quiet job of delivering networks services during the dot com bust; it ruined the ordinary practice of staying employed and moving during the financial crisis; it didn’t hurt as much but wasted a lot of time and energy during the crypto excitement, and seems to causing people to somehow think that increasing our (based on 2026 chips) compute capacity by an order of magnitude or so makes sense (which economically represents real pessimism - we spend a few trillion on this years technology is saying we don’t think that the rate of growth of tech power will continue to increase in the out years).
Asking for good-faith compliance, and failing that, simply waiting for slop enthusiasts to publicly brag about using LLMs to break the rules. All evidence suggests that it is impossible for slop enthusiasts to resist outing themselves for any significant span of time.
Zswap is better than ZRAM for this use case. ZRAM is only really interesting in situations where you don't want any swap to disk, like when running on an SD card or something.
> When you have a dialog window too big for the screen, you can Alt+Space to open the system menu, then activate the Move menu item, then you can use arrow keys to move the window around, even with the title bar out of bounds.
On Linux it's just Alt+drag anywhere on the window to move it.
They looked at the global chart, but did they take into account that the Steam Machine isn't available everywhere?
It's also a single point in time while the chart is constantly changing. Right now for example the Steam Machine is in 3rd place behind Palworld, while in their calculation it was above it.
Yeah I mean specifically the "sell at a loss, wait for costs to get lower over the generation" thing. if it's at a loss at the start of the generation and component costs only rise, it'll still sell for a loss at the end but also it'll be more expensive for customers. this puts the company in a hard position. a lot of gamers are also used to waiting until the end of the life of a console and getting games used, which might no longer be an option
I don't think you really understood my point then, maybe I didn't make it clearly.
What I meant was we abandon perfectly good console hardware, not because it's outdated or obsolete, not because games demand the cutting edge, but because profit margins demand the consumer spend 500+ on new hardware every 5 years or whatever. It's nothing to do with the software and everything to do with shareholders.
The PC is the exact opposite of this.
There are no PC games that force you to buy a whole new device. There are games that your 5 year old PC might struggle with, but they're still compatible.
The top games on steam are mostly things that would run on 15 year old gaming rigs.
Backwards compatibility! I can still play games from decades ago on my current PC. On a console you're in luck if the game you played on the last generation is rereleased on the next one
You're not locked into a store, a network, or even an operating system.
It's true the AAA devs don't optimize much but my point is that Microsoft don't decide that you have to buy a new PC every five years and there are a bunch of new games coming out for it that are literally unavailable on your old one.
(Well ok technically they do exactly this but it's called an Xbox and it's a failure right now)
> It's true the AAA devs don't optimize much but my point is that Microsoft don't decide that you have to buy a new PC every five years and there are a bunch of new games coming out for it that are literally unavailable on your old one.
It's the game developers who will decide for you on PC, but even Microsoft does so on occasion, like recently with Windows 11's arbitrary CPU requirements.
Yes, but you don't have to use Windows 11. You can install win10, 8 or XP, or Linux freely on your PC, you can't do that on a PlayStation and even if you could, the games would stop working
I would argue that in some spaces it has gotten better. Ever since the Steamdeck became popular, that kind of set a lower bound on hardware. Games have ended up being optimised a little to run on that because it is another potential 5 million+ customers.
reply