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.

But your case is wrong anyways because i <= INT_MAX will always be true, by definition. By your argument < is actually better because it is consistent from < 0 to iterate 0 times to < INT_MAX to iterate the maximum number of times. INT_MAX + 1 is the problem, not < which is the standard to write for loops and the standard for a reason.

Technically if it doesn’t have a bathtub or shower it is called a powder room. But that phrase is rarely used. (Mostly because 90% of the time when we say bathroom we mean toilet.)

Actually I would pick GIMP.

1. Says what it is, an image editor.
2. No popups and random interruptions.
3. Not only AI editing examples which makes me thing the tool is AI only.
4. An overview of the variety of major features it has rather than just AI editing.
5. Links to helpful documentation rather than endless marketing pages that say nothing.

Really think only thing I would like to see is some screenshots and examples of using the tool, rather than just info on what it does. But the Photoshop page barely has this, just a few examples of the AI tools.

Huh?

I’ve used Vim for a decade and I would be offended if it made any noise.

Maybe, but some of my favourite channels do YouTube as a full-time job. Maybe they would still post part-time if they couldn’t profit off of but the videos would almost certainly be less-frequent and be made with tighter budgets.

But even then I find it hard to believe. I subscribe to a bunch of seemingly for-fun channels but most of my favourites have by this point become full-time video creators. GCP Grey, Captain Disillusion, Technology Connections, Tom Scott, Veritasium…

It is true that money can corrupt, but in this world you also need an income, and if you need to devote a lot of time to get income from a different source then that only distracts from the time and energy that you can put towards making videos.

If you just want the video call part you can use https://call.element.io/ and get E2EE calls by sharing a link. It has worked pretty well for me.

There was one bug a few weeks ago where new participants wouldn’t show up but that seems to have been fixed.

But that’s my point. If these creators on different sites charged between $0.26 and $1.30 I would have subscribed to a bunch of them. But when they are charging $5/month that is quite a different amount to pay. Something that I would only really be considering for my absolute favourites.

I would love to see some easy built-in monetization system for PeerTube. Ideally this could be “micropayments” style subscriptions where you could pay a small amount to subscribe to a channel or a small-amount per video (with batched payments to avoid too high of fees). I would also love to see a “pay what you want” subscription option and tipping.

It would probably need to be plugable so that different payment providers can be used, but even just starting with one would be exciting.

I still recommend it. I’m not fully happy with the situation but for now I consider it my best option.

1. I consider Chromium-based browsers out of the question as they give too much power to Google. This is already showing to be a problem with new APIs and “features” that Google is pushing into the web platform and the bigger the market share gets the more control they have.
2. Web browsers are the biggest attack surface that most people have. Displaying untrusted webpages and running untrusted code is incredibly difficult and vulnerabilities are regularly discovered. I don’t yet know a Firefox fork that I trust enough to reliably respond to security vulnerabilities quickly and correctly.

So for now I am staying with raw Firefox. Not to mention that as a disto-built Firefox I have some insulation from Mozilla’s ToS. But I am very much considering some of the forks, especially the ones that are very light with patches and are mostly configuration tweaks.

PeerTube doesn’t have a monetization story aside from sponsorships which means that it won’t be a real competitor from YouTube. There are lots of “for fun” YouTube channels but what enables so many people to publish so many videos is the fact that they can profit off of them. PeerTube is great, I follow a handful of channels, but it won’t be a YouTube competitor until people can actually run a business on it.

I love creators hosting their content on more disparate platforms, I would love to see less centralization. But the problem is that these all cost so much. YouTube Premium is $13/month and I get access to a huge variety of channels. LTT on Floatplane is $5/month for one collection of channels (which are available on YouTube, maybe with some bits cut). Corridor Digital is similar at $4/month.

Very few channels actually provide me $5/month worth of value. This is only really reasonable for the biggest fans (which admittedly I am not of either of these). Even if these channels have a few videos a week (maybe LTT is over daily with all of their different programs) that is a lot to pay for little variety.

I understand the problem here. Only a tiny number of users are actually going to sign up anyways, so you need to extract more value from them. Say LTT makes $0.50/month from the average subscriber on YouTube. If they charged $0.50/month for their Floatplane channel they would actually loose money, because the people that sign up on Floatplane are going to be above average subscribers. So they need to charge more to even break even (let’s say they value control enough that they aren’t looking for increased revenue). But as they raise the price along the curve they are even more heavily filtering for the biggest fans, which were bringing them in top percentile revenue on YouTube, making the problem even worse. This means that these platforms are always going to be priced to profit off the whales, rather than the casual users who enjoy watching some videos from these channels. Maybe in some beautiful feature where publishing on separate platforms becomes normalized this will change, but it is very far in the future and a huge roadblock to getting to that future.