Cricket

@Cricket@lemmy.zip

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The huge Project Zomboid build 42 finally gets multiplayer just in time for the holidays⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks, I had not heard of the forks!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Sorry for the delay. I needed to take a break from online drama, and hope to continue avoiding getting sucked into it if possible. :)

  I mean, Russia’s trying to make far-right takeovers happen pretty hard.

  If they are, it doesn’t seem like they’re trying as hard as the US has in the past. Social media manipulation is in no way equivalent to supporting or initiating coups. Even if they have done some similar things, it’s been on a much smaller scale, at least an order of magnitude less.

  The thing in question at this point, I think, is if it’s a reason why we should support anybody (or almost anybody) who opposes the US. Just saying that the US should chill wouldn’t be out there enough to argue with.

  I’m not sure I understand your second point here, but I think that the first question could be turned right around: why should anyone support the US or any of its closest partners? I think the answer lies in the fact that most countries in the world (the so-called “Global South”) have not supported the US/West position in either Ukraine or Palestine.

  Hmm. That would include the end of the actual colonial era. There was a lot of what you could describe as “high-pressure tactics” used by Europe against the various independence movements.

  I would still have to see any evidence that what I said (essentially that the US has been the biggest bully in the world for the last 80 years) is way off the mark.

  During the Cold War the reason given was usually “to stop communism”, since then it’s more like “for democracy” or “to stop atrocities”.

  The claim that it was to “stop communism” seemed to have been sincere.

  The more recent claims that it’s to “stop atrocities” has some weight, but not a ton. How many times has the US used heavy foreign policy tactics purely for that purpose?

  The claims that it’s “for democracy” is very weak when there are examples in the recent past of the US either supporting or not opposing coups against democratically-elected foreign leaders. The first example that comes to mind is the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt after the Arab Spring. From what I recall, there was hardly a squeak from the US when that happened, because it benefited the US.

  That may or may not be drinking the kool-aid. If you are yourself a non-communist democracy, those can overlap with national interest, which is definitely a slippery slope. That’s not the same as it being purely propaganda, though (which looking back through the thread is where this tangent started).

  I don’t know if I said “purely propaganda”, but if I did, I probably meant “mostly propaganda”.

  Thanks.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Those are two or more separate concepts (freedom of thought vs. the government being for the people) and don’t necessarily have to go together.

  Also, authoritarianism occurs in a spectrum. Most of the countries that Westerners accuse of being authoritarian are only partially so, and only in certain aspects. On the other hand, there are legitimate arguments to be made that many Western powers are also partially authoritarian. So then the argument becomes about how much authoritarianism is acceptable. I think that this is too deep of a philosophical discussion to have in an online forum. At least I wouldn’t have the patience or energy to stick with it.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The huge Project Zomboid build 42 finally gets multiplayer just in time for the holidays⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Sounds great, thanks! I’ll definitely check it out. Oh, interesting, there are tilesets for it.

  Haha, I had never heard of Caves of Qud before. That looks super old-school. Brings back memories of 8-bit games. I’ll take a look at that too. Thanks!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The huge Project Zomboid build 42 finally gets multiplayer just in time for the holidays⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Oh, I see. I don’t think I remembered that CDDA was turn-based. It seems like making that work in a multiplayer scenario would be an interesting programming problem to resolve.

  The multiplayer aspect is one of the big attractions of Zomboid for me. I’ve barely ever played it alone because I feel it’s too disconcerting of a game to be played that way. The multiplayer does offer some pretty cool an unique experiences too.

  I’ll check CDDA one of these days to see what all the hype is about. :)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The huge Project Zomboid build 42 finally gets multiplayer just in time for the holidays⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Cool, thanks for your detailed reply! I can totally imagine that the less graphical approach would have that effect on the imagination. Is it multiplayer too, or single player?

  It’s interesting that I think of Zomboid as having super-deep mechanics, although the impression that I have of CDDA just from hearing about it before is that it’s even more so. However, the example you used about curtains and cloth is pretty well-resolved in Zomboid too. You can craft out of curtains and you can make cloth (and thread) from the clothes of any zombie corpse.

  What you described about the long survival game seems like it could have some added risks from a graphical approach. The example I have in mind is that I’ve heard of people dying after being in a fully setup base for a while because they had a misstep and fell off the roof of their base. Another example is someone walking a little too close to an open fire they had started and their clothes catching on fire. I think they even ended up burning their base down because they walked into it trying to put their clothes fire out. :)

  This 42 update is also supposed to add a lot more depth to some of the crafting mechanics and allow for thinks like hunting and animal farming (vegetable farming has been around for a long time). I hadn’t tried it yet though because I mostly play multiplayer with friends.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The huge Project Zomboid build 42 finally gets multiplayer just in time for the holidays⁩ ⁨⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I’ve kept hearing about CDDA over the years, often in discussions about PZ. Apparently it was also one of the inspirations for PZ.

  I find PZ to be very immersive, so I’m curious what makes CDDA even more immersive for you? Could it not having much graphics perhaps help your imagination in a way similar to how books can sometimes immerse us more than movies can?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Is it normal to be really sentimental/upset over a bowl I accidentally smashed? I had it since I was 17 (am 30 now) and my boyfriend was alive back then too.⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yeah, it looks like they misread what the “17” and “30” in the OP title were referring to.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Israel’s IDF Bans Android Phones—iPhones Now ‘Mandatory’⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks for your answer.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  My sense of the Cold War examples is that they happened in places that were on a kind of knife’s edge already. Like Chile - there was an existing underfunded, previously influential and endogamous military that didn’t need to much encouragement to take down Allende, electoral mandate be damned. They managed to gain influence across a lot of Latin America at the time, but there’s no comparable place now. In modern areas with unstable governments, the US has been losing ground this decade, as opposed to running the show.

  If the US was secretly replacing otherwise-stable governments all over the world, it would take vast numbers of people all over and be much too hard to perfectly to cover up. France’s program in north Africa ended up an open secret, for example. You don’t need it to explain anything either; so, it’s not supported by Occam’s razor. And obviously, how could I falsify that idea? This is when it starts feeling like arguing against a conspiracy theory. Every thing you can say against it gets twisted into evidence for a successful coverup.

  Sure, I agree that there were already internal elements that helped those regime change operations, but the way I see it, that’s true of most countries around the world. Look at the rise of the right in Europe and the US in the last few years. I think the main difference between those examples and the regime changes in the past is that there’s no “accelerant”, (i.e., something like the type of involvement the US’ CIA had in those countries). I’m not saying that the US is secretly controlling the entire world. I’m saying the US has a knee-jerk reaction to deeply meddle in order to promote regimes that advantage them and depose regimes that disadvantage them. I don’t see why this point should be controversial or feel like a conspiracy theory. The US has demonstrably engaged in more covert and overt regime change operations and high-pressure tactics around the world than the entire rest of the world combined, since the end of World War II.

  My point there was just that a lot of the decision makers believe they’re doing something noble (and the rest just want to get re-elected). At least in my country, which is culturally very close to the US, foreign policy isn’t a deliberately self-serving enterprise. (Although the fascist/“far-right populist” movement obviously goes in exactly that direction, and claims it’s a virtue)

  I think that if you look at their actions, the majority of these people that believe they’re doing something noble have drunk massive amounts of kool-aid. I can’t speak for Canada because I don’t know enough about their foreign policy, but I think claiming that US foreign policy isn’t a deliberately self-serving enterprise is pretty far out there and would need to some major evidence to the contrary, like perhaps demonstrating what was the actual noble purpose of all the regime change operations of the past. I’m sure that there are some people who get into foreign policy to help the world and not just the US, but I fear that’s a small minority.

  The first example I was thinking of there is Venezuela. Conditions in the nation are really bad, there’s been mass migration out of it, and it’s not hard to find a Venezuelan that hates Maduro and friends. He can say it’s the CIA planting people, but even if you agree that none of the situation is actually his fault, it’s not the CIA - people do blame the current government. Same story during the Arab Spring. Really, dictators will usually say an enemy manufactured any civil unrest, and the US is the obvious choice for some of them. Others blame local rivals, and historically Jews were popular.

  Do you not believe that the CIA has been deeply involved in Venezuela since the time that Hugo Chavez came to power there? If you really don’t think that’s the case, I don’t know what to tell you. If you do believe that’s the case, why should the US be involved in the domestic affairs of other countries (this particular country having the largest known oil reserves in the world, I might add)?

  Interesting, I might have to read that. In my head the banana republic coups worked like half the time, but maybe that’s just because nobody talks about the failed ones.

  Yeah, I thought that was interesting too, but I haven’t read the citation. I was surprised by it too.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Israel’s IDF Bans Android Phones—iPhones Now ‘Mandatory’⁩ ⁨⁨3⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I would be interested to know what definition of fascism you are using that includes the USSR and North Korea. Fascism is not the same thing as authoritarianism, if that’s the definition you’re going by.

  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definitions_of_fascism

  A significant number of scholars agree that a “fascist regime” is foremost an authoritarian form of government; however, the general academic consensus also holds that not all authoritarian regimes are fascist, and more distinguishing traits are required for a regime to be characterized as such.[2][3]

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I can understand that. I didn’t realize that Reddit had that feature. I totally hear you that defaults stay defaults.

  I may not have been very clear, but what I meant was that users would be able to create and share their own structures without approval or interaction from admins or mods, then admins would be able to pick and choose from those structures that users created and shared, and then the admins would have the option to make those structures the defaults for their instances if they wished.

  However, I can see that having this kind of sharing structure could get pretty messy with tons of different structures around. I can also see that the structures could get outdated quickly. I also agree with you that it would probably be better for community creators/mods to self-organize with other communities to structure this.

  I think you’re probably right in your approach, but like I said before, it would benefit from being as simple as possible. Perhaps it would be the best to break down your ideas into smaller sets of features so they can be implemented in phases, or maybe even eliminate some features?

  Like, for instance, why have permissions, hiding, or cross-community moderation? Why not simplify it to its most basic level: allow two communities to be linked with each other (at the request of either and agreement from the other for them to be in a specific hierarchy) and allow either community to rescind that linkage at any time? This link would make it so that users who subscribe to the “supercommunity” would also get all posts from any “subcommunities” (unless the same user has blocked any particular “subcommunity”, in which case they would still not see that sub’s posts). I think that just these two features would implement most of what I think we would both like to see, while being straight-forward. This could even be thought of as similar to a type of inter-community federation.

  I’m thinking out loud too. :)

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Those are all good questions. I’m inclined to think that keeping this as simple as possible and following similar principles to the existing moderation environment would help make this useful while not creating too much extra work for moderators or admins, as both groups already seem overworked. I think this will already be complicated enough to begin with (for instance, how will communities in other instances be handled?) and fraught with potential for conflicts (for instance, include or not include communities of certain political slants?), so care should be taken to keep this somewhat minimalistic.

  With that in mind, here are some possible concepts to consider:

  Moderation: following the principle that Lemmy/Piefed allows moderation by users (through blocking users, communities, and instances), community mods (through removing posts and banning users), and instance admins (through overseeing mods and defederating or default blocking other instances), in that order, how about if the users themselves were the first (and perhaps only) ones to decide and control which lower-level communities they want to see structured in their feed and how? It seems to me that community mods should only be able to moderate their own community at each level, and not be able to moderate posts from levels below.

  Creation and use of taxonomies: should the creation of the taxonomy be the job of users, community mods, or instance admins? I’m inclined to think that this should also ultimately be left to users to determine, but there could be a mechanism that allows anyone to share/publish a taxonomy that they find useful (or perhaps branches of a taxonomy, like Gaming), and allow other users to either import or subscribe the taxonomy or branches that they like, from a list of different available ones that have been shared/published. Admins could then have the option of setting entire taxonomies or a group of branches as defaults for users of their instances. This would allow users the freedom to create the structure that they would like to see while also allowing others to benefit from that work and not have to duplicate it, and finally also allowing for different competing structures to exist. Community mods could informally ask creators/maintainers of taxonomies or branches to include their communities in that structure. To add communities to a structure, there could be a simple button in each community that said something like “add to structure”.

  I think that doing things this way would allow the most freedom, flexibility, and utility, while also minimizing additional work for mods and admins, as well as any potential for conflicts. Another factor to consider would be how much impact would this kind of thing have on resource utilization of instances?

  I hope this all makes sense and helps provide some ideas for how this could work.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Screw it, I’m installing Linux⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Interesting, thanks. I wasn’t aware of any of that. Yes, it sounds complicated, and I hope that Linux can eventually improve these issues you mentioned.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Interesting, thanks!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Oh, haha, FR? I had no idea!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Gmail can read your emails and attachments to train its AI, unless you opt out⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  From what I’ve been hearing, AI has indeed been getting worse, not better. I think I read this in relation to ChatGPT 5 compared to previous models.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Ha, I hadn’t heard of any of this. What happened with the Reddit meetup?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I think this is an awesome idea! It would allow people to have the freedom to create any community they wanted, but still keep posts concentrated enough for visitors to see activity they can participate in. Excellent, maybe you could propose this to the developers of Lemmy and Piefed? Is Mbin still being actively developed?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨What would you want to see this site do differently from Reddit?⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Yes, thank you! This is a big mistake that I’ve seen new online communities make since at least the beginning of the internet. I first saw it with the old forums. Start a forum site for subject X, create sub-forums x1 through x57 for every possible subtopic, no matter how minor or niche. Go into most of those subforums, you only hear crickets. To encourage activity, most subjects should be concentrated in few forums at first, until those forums become too busy. Only at that time is it a good idea to split into subforums.

  Some Lemmy sites have had the correct idea, where they don’t allow users to create communities. There should be a process where admins manage whether it makes sense to create communities after evaluating requests. Unfortunately, the decentralized nature of Lemmy makes this difficult to control, because as soon as one instance does this, someone wanting to create a new community will just move to another instance that allows it. I’m not sure if there is a solution to this.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Google’s Sundar Pichai says the job of CEO is one of the ‘easier things’ AI could soon replace⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks, I hadn’t seen a ??? -> Profit meme in quite a while! : D

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Screw it, I’m installing Linux⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Got you, I understand now that you were more countering Linux fanbois than putting down Linux itself. In any case, I’m not sure I understand several of your points and would like to understand them better.

  Are you saying that you prefer KDE Plasma, so that Pop OS being based on Gnome is a non-starter? On a related note, if you haven’t yet, take a look at the Pop OS beta for their COSMIC desktop. It’s kind of in-between KDE and Gnome and written in Rust. It’s more like gnome, but has more features and allows more tweaking out of the gate. Plus it seems very fast. It’s pretty close to being released, I think I heard December 11th or some date around that?

  What do you mean about changing the explicit driver and manually messing around with nouveau? How about the bios setting part?

  I feel that Linux can work pretty well for a lot of people. Sure, nothing works for everyone though.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks. I think that out of those two, that’s a better option too. Good luck with your development of alternatives though. It could be useful!

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Thanks, there’s an interesting technical discussion to be had about how to address these issues with Lemmy and the Fediverse in general. I’m not much of an actual programmer although I’ve programmed a lot in school over the years. With that caveat, nowadays I would be inclined to only start brand new coding projects using memory-safe languages. There are so many wonderful ones to choose from nowadays that are not only more secure but also more productive, and most of them can use C and C++ libraries.

  Getting back to my previous message though, given the two choices that are currently available, defederate from an instance that may have some issues in some of their communities, or let users decide whether to block them, which one would you chose?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I wasn’t trying to say that being open to tankie arguments is the same as believing in a flat earth. I was only making the comparison to explain the sense of futility and exhaustion many people feel when they encounter an argument they’ve had so many times. There’s a point where you recognize a fundamental difference in worldview, and that any further discussion is pointless.

  That makes more sense, thanks. I feel the same way about some discussions about this stuff.

  Personally, I think western capitalism is bad and needs to be replaced. But I also think that anyone who denies the genocides recognized by the majority of the world is being willfully ignorant. Many people seem to have a very limited ideology of “everything western = bad” and believe that brutal regimes elsewhere are somehow perfect utopias, despite well-documented evidence of the contrary.

  Without trying to get into a detailed discussion about it, what genocides do you have in mind, so I have a better idea of how to think about what you’re saying? The issue with “recognized by the majority of the world” is that it’s a problematic concept nowadays, and perhaps always was. The West and specifically the people that control the West, very much control the narratives that we receive in the West, to manipulate the people for political purposes. Some things where people start screaming “genocide” are nothing that any average person would recognize as such, or have a much more nuanced story. I think a lot of the heated discussions around this boil down to disagreements about a) the supposed genocide claims being a lot more nuanced and generally less terrible than the narrative that the West tries to push, b) the idea of providing “critical support” for countries that may do some arguably bad things while fighting the Western capitalist hegemony and trying to build actual alternatives. Maybe some people believe that these countries are perfect utopias, but I think that most recognize that those countries and systems have flaws and have made errors (like all countries do), but that they are still worthy of that “critical support” because they represent the only alternative and resistance to the Western system that has any chance of working.

  As I understand it, the term “tankie” specifically refers to people who deny or defend the brutal tactics used by communist leaders, often denying genocide. If someone tells me they agree with tankie ideology, I don’t have much confidence that conversation about it will do anyone any good. So in that regard, I empathize and understand why the person you were talking to went quiet after that.

  My understanding of the term “tankie” is a little broader than that. I don’t think it’s specific to genocide, but it allows for the idea that socialist and communist leaders have sometimes had to resort to harsh and perhaps heavy-handed tactics to maintain their system in the face of a constant barrage of threats and attacks from every possible direction. From what I understand, it specifically started being used in reference to the USSR sending in tanks to quash a worker revolt in Hungary(?) in the 50s(?). A revolt about which we just recently(?) got evidence that the CIA was involved in.

  Thanks for your reply and explanation of your points.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Ok, fair enough, thanks for providing your perspective, but do you think that the proper way to address that is for everyone to defederate an instance that has a lot of good non-political content or for people who are bothered by the mods in political discussions there to block the instance or the problematic communities where the mods exercise a heavy hand?

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Not as much as you’d think, honestly.

  Okay, I don’t have numbers to back up my claim, but the strong impression I have is that any country that tries to implement any government system the US doesn’t like or especially if they try to nationalize some industry or make their markets or their resources more difficult for American companies to access get swiftly overthrown, either overtly or covertly. The only reason to take a step like that would be if those companies had a sweeheart deal in the first place, i.e., wealth extraction.

  I’m also involved in politics. There’s legit ideology there, just like there was legit ideology in the Soviet Union.

  Sure, I don’t doubt that many people who get into for instance the State Department have legit ideology. But the fact remains that the foreign policy of the US has remained fairly stable across multiple administrations from both parties, which essentially amounts to saying “promoting freedom and democracy” but in actuality promoting expanding military power around the world and expanding economic power as a result of that military presence at just about any cost.

  What are you thinking of there? I can’t really come up with anything past the 80’s. Some leaders will blame the West for their own domestic protesters, but it’s always BS. If the US couldn’t find one guy for that long they certainly can’t whip up an entire nation.

  See en.wikipedia.org/…/Foreign_interventions_by_the_U… and worldpopulationreview.com/…/united-states-involve…

  Those are only the ones that we know about, which is very likely a fraction of the recent ones because most of this stuff is secret and will continue to be so for 50 years. I don’t agree at all that it’s always BS. If you’re talking about Bin Laden, that’s a completely different kind of case that’s unrelated to intelligence efforts to manipulate other countries and also because as far as I know the US didn’t have any presence in Afghanistan before 9/11.

  US-friendly governments keep coming to power in different places, especially in Latin America, and often under contentious circumstances. Do you think that that keeps happening because the people of those countries love the US? I would be more inclined to believe that the CIA was involved in overthrowing governments when those governments claim that than not. Because it’s happened dozens and dozens of times in the last 80 years. There’s a strong pattern there, almost like a habit.

  Here’s a good quote from that Wikipedia article:

  A 2016 study by Carnegie Mellon University professor Dov Levin found that the United States intervened in 81 foreign elections between 1946 and 2000, with the majority of those being through covert, rather than overt, actions.[98][99] A 2021 review of the existing literature found that foreign interventions since World War II tend overwhelmingly to fail to achieve their purported objectives.[100]

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Sure, but it doesn’t stop them from being legally forced to provide the info regardless.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨Screw it, I’m installing Linux⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  I will remind you : Nvidia is not easy on Linux. And so far as my research it never has.

  So far for me, NVidia has been easier on Pop OS than on Windows. The proprietary NVidia driver comes pre-installed on Pop OS downloads (the ones intended for NVidia).

  If we compare from bare metal:

  Windows: download the OS, prepare the media, install the OS, look for the correct driver, download it, install it, make sure to avoid the unnecessary junk that comes with the driver.

  Pop OS: download the OS, prepare the media, install the OS.

• ⁨Comment⁩ on ⁨The crusade against Lemmy devs, lemmy.ml, and so-called "tankies"⁩ ⁨⁨5⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago⁩:

  Like I mentioned, I’m not a lawyer and have no legal training, but it seems to me that someone could legally force an instance to at a minimum provide IP logs, email addresses, etc.