No I just use YouTube’s feeds.

Yes, a lot of feeds, especially the more commercial ones, only have a teaser in the feed. Most people don’t like this. But lots of feeds want to try and estimate how many readers they have. Since RSS has better privacy by design they can’t really tell if you read it or not. So they force you to visit the site.

However IMHO RSS is still valuable here. Because now I get my notifications in the same place. For example I subscribe to YouTube via RSS even though YouTube tries as hard as it can to force you to watch the video on-site or in-app. This is because RSS lets me reliably get notified about all of the channels and playlists that I am interested in. I can also mix in feeds from elsewhere (Nebula, PeerTube, …) into the same feed so that I just look at one place and have all of my video history.

In some cases you can combat this. Many feed readers will attempt to scrape the full article from the site. This means that you may not have to leave your reader to enjoy the whole article. However this isn’t very reliable and can be pretty difficult depending on how antagonistic the site is. There are also tools that will consume the original feel and produce a new feed with (hopefully) full text articles.

But at the end of the day this is the choice the site is offering you. If you don’t find their feeds useful just don’t use them. You can either visit manually to check, use whatever other notification systems they provide or try to build your own feed (see “feed builder” tools that scrape sites to produce feeds).

It’s always sad when a well-love project goes unmaintained. However it is nice that if had a clear exit. I would have appreciated if the code could be kept online a bit longer for archival efforts but a month isn’t the worst.

I hope other maintainers step up with forks. It will take a while to see which forks are stable and well maintained but it seems like the project was fairly complete and stable so it shouldn’t be too difficult to keep going.

I did take an archive of all of the Git repos on https://git.tt-rss.org/. I encourage anyone who can to grab a copy for preservation. I’ll seed it myself a long while, probably at least a year. But probably not forever.

magnet:?xt=urn:btih:0d70be6a837096aff29e13c29e7ec25961ce3d09&xt=urn:btmh:1220054379c509e2c722d5109a10ff594d5f8916baf9d6152a278e05768fd8d76f65&dn=tt-rss&xl=246415360&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Ftracker.opentrackr.org%3A1337%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.demonii.com%3A1337%2Fannounce&tr=udp%3A%2F%2Fopen.stealth.si%3A80%2Fannounce

I’m also not familiar. But my understanding is that the package maintainers should prevent this situation. Because otherwise even if there are package version dependencies (I don’t actually know if pacman does this) it would just block the update which results in a partial update which isn’t supported. For example if your theoretical unmaintained Firefox blocks the update of libssl but Python requires new functionality you would be stuck in dependency hell. Leaving this problem to the users just makes this problem worse. So the package maintainers need to sort something out.

It is a huge pain when it happens but tends to be pretty rare in practice. Typically they can just wait for software to update or ship a small patch to fix it. But in the worst case you need to maintain two versions of the common dependency. In lots of distros very common dependencies tend to get different packages for different major version for this reason. For example libfoo1 and libfoo2. Then there can be a period where both are supported while packages slowly move from one to the other.

IF no dependency tries to update too. Off course in that case I would stop. Without pacman -Sy, I never do that anyway, only -Syu.

That’s all you need to know. As long as you always use pacman -Syu you will be fine. pacman -Sy is the real problem. The wiki page is pretty clear about the sequences of commands that are problematic https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/System_maintenance#Partial_upgrades_are_unsupported.

Right? What i don’t understand is, when I uninstall with pacman -Rs firefox, delete the cached firefox package (only that file), then the system is in the same state as before I installed it. Then -S firefox should be okay, right? And it even looks up the new version.

This isn’t correct. It won’t look up the new version. Assuming that the system was in a consistent state it will download the exact same package that you deleted. The system only ever “updates” when you run pacman -Sy. Until you use -y all packages are effectively pinned at a specific version. If the version that gets installed is different than the one you removed it probably means that you were breaking the partial update rule previously.

But that is my point. Just running pacman -S firefox is fine as long as you didn’t run pacman -Sy at some point earlier. It won’t update anything, even dependencies. It will just install the version that matches your current package list and system including the right version of any dependencies if they aren’t already installed.

But that means if you already have Firefox installed it will do nothing.

I think you are a little confused at the problem here. The issue is that partial updates are not supported. The reason for this is very simple, Arch ensures that any given package list works on its own, but not that packages from different versions of the package list work together. So if Firefox depends on libssl the new Firefox package may depend on a new libssl function. If you install that version of Firefox without updating libssl it will cause problems.

There is no way around this limitation. If you install that new Firefox without he new libssl you will have problems. No matter how you try to rules lawyer it. Now 99% of the time this works. Typically packages don’t depend on new library functions right away. But sometimes they do, and that is why as a rule this is unsupported. You are welcome to try it, but if it breaks don’t complain to the devs, they never promised it would work. But this isn’t some policy where you can find a loophole. It is a technical limitation. If you manage to find a loophole people aren’t going to say “oh, that should work, let’s fix it” it will break and you will be on your own to fix it.

Focusing on your commands. The thing is that pacman -S firefox is always fine on its own. If Firefox is already installed it will do nothing, if it isn’t it will install the version from the current package list. Both of those operations are supported. Also pacman -Rs firefox && pacman -S firefox is really no different than just pacman -S firefox (other than potentially causing problems if the package can’t be allowed to be removed due to dependencies). So your command isn’t accomplishing anything even if it did somehow magically work around the rules.

What is really the problem is pacman -Sy. This command updates the package list without actually updating any packages. This will enter you system into a precarious state where any new package installed or updated (example our pacman -S firefox command form earlier) will be a version that is mismatched with the rest of your system. This is unsupported and will occasionally cause problems. Generally speaking you shouldn’t run pacman -Sy, any time you are using -Sy you should also be passing -u. This ensures that the package list and your installed packages are updated together.

You are misunderstanding. They are forcing people to use LLMs at the cost of productivity so that they can hopefully find places where LLMs can improve productivity.

This isn’t really unreasonable. They are basically trying to get ahead of the adoption curve by forcing pre-mature adoption and find use cases. Bezos loves firing workers so this is basically a win-win. If it works they offload more work to LLMs and fire workers, if it doesn’t work other workers get a bad performance review and get fired.

/favicon.ico is the only “default” URL. /favicon.ico is usually not an actual “icon” type anymore but PNG or JPG (but with the same URL). Other than that you need to load the HTML and check for Link headers or <link rel=icon> elements. While URLs like /favicon.png may be popular they aren’t part of any actual protocol.

Sort of…

You can just hope that /favicon.ico works. But 1. it often doesn’t and 2. it is often of low quality.

To find a favicon on a modern site you need to load the HTML and check Link headers and <link rel=icon> elements. However you likely can’t do this client-side for most sites because of CORS. So you need some server (at the very least to strip CORS). That lets you get the URL but 1. you probably don’t want to have connections to external domains for user privacy and 2. some domains will have hot-link protection so you need to fetch the image via your server. You will also want to consider different image formats and sizes to serve the right image to the right client. On top of all of this the site may be using some sort of bot protection which you will have to fight. Google is almost always whitelisted. The site may also have temporary outages so having a cache would be nice, especially if that is almost always populated before you even know the domain exists.

At the end of the day you do want some sort of API. And while it isn’t complex it isn’t trivial. So it is nice to just let Google handle it. (Other than tracking risks, but you could proxy Google’s API.)

Of course nixpkgs has it. It was added a few years ago, I can’t vouch for if it is up to date or still working.

Maybe in some areas. But in downtown Toronto tons of restaurants are super busy, and delivery orders seem through the roof. But this also doesn’t really solve the tipping problem, it seems pretty orthogonal.

No, I don’t mean a law. I don’t even know how you would make this a law. You can already legally just walk away. Maybe you can have a law that the “no tip” option on card machines must be at least as easy as the tip option or something.

There is no such thing as “everyone”, but you only need a tipping point. Maybe 1/3 of people or similar. You just need enough awareness so that it isn’t considered incredibly rude or outrageous, that most retail workers will understand what is happening and the businesses will see it coming. It definitely wouldn’t be easy, that is why I would put the target date far in advance (maybe next January is actually too close). So that cultural knowledge could slowly be built and enough people to make a difference would switch at the same time.

IMHO if we want to get rid of tips the way to go about it is to pick a date (for example January 1st 2026) then agree to stop tipping on that date. Hard and fast stop doing it. Stores can raise their prices to compensate.

The problem is that it is very hard to make this change incrementally. Because individuals are considered assholes if they don’t tip enough. So we all sort of got to get together and agree to it. Of course it will be hard to publicize this because big media companies are all owned by the rich that benefit by paying minimum wage workers less with the excuse that they can get tips.

While I agree, I think that getting more games on Linux is far more useful. When Linux is almost 3% very few studios will care much. If they can do a small bit of testing on Proton and maybe work around a bug or two they are far more likely to do that then make and test a native build. If this then gets Linux usage to 5, 10 or 20% that will drive more native builds.

So I agree that it somewhat reduces the incentive to release a native build. But I think that is outweighed by the benefits of making the Linux gaming experience better today which will have a greater impact on availability of native builds in the future.

It’s been fine. But I’m a decently well off young white dude who has never had trouble with borders anywhere. But I will still avoid it as much as I can.

poweroff or shutdown will work on almost every distro. Even systemd ones (they are usually symlinks but doesn’t really matter because they work).

They want to make money off of services, every service they offer requires a Microsoft account to purchase and use. Everyone that they force to make an account during setup is one step closer to paying for a Microsoft service.

There are obviously tradeoffs (less sales of these versions of windows and some users pushed away from Windows altogether among others), but the motivation is clear.

Just looking at the numbers, they are spending $5G and losing $1G. Their subscriptions are growing. So if they grow another 25% they are making money. (Ignoring infrastructure costs which are most likely a tiny fraction of per-user revenue.) They also just launched an Android app. So I think their story is looking pretty good. Not even considering that it raises the value of Apple TV hardware, their other devices and gives them more lock-in for customers in general that seems like a great investment they made.

This is what I moved to after Gandi started becoming shit and I have nothing bad to say about them yet.