That’s fair. I agree that it would be nice for them to properly release SteamOS for general hardware. I think valve probably doesn’t want to get roped in to providing tech support for hardware platforms they don’t control beyond what they do for steam.

My impression is that their priority is building the hardware to show what’s possible in the form factor, then get third parties to buy in to the ecosystem to keep it going (which we’re seeing with steamos support for the Asus and Lenovo handhelds). The software has to be polished and well-received to get this buy-in, which is easier when they have control over the hardware.

Their strategy with the original steam machines (circa 2015 I think?) skipped the first party hardware step and they didn’t do well with the software execution either- although iirc that’s where the big picture mode, steam controller, and generally better controller support came from.

In addition to what others have said, Peter Thiel’s Founders Fund invested in Brave. You know, the Palantir guy who thinks Greta Thunberg is the antichrist? I’m not going within a country mile of anything his blood money touches when I can help it.

SteamOS is already an extant distro (based on Arch btw), it’s what they use for the steam deck/machine/frame. It’s also available to download but there is no official support. I’ve been meaning to try it on my desktop, as I primarily use it for gaming anyways

SteamOS wikipedia page since the steam page keeps redirecting me to the app

That’s wild, I don’t think I’ve ever had an issue like that before! I pretty much only buy the boneless/skinless breasts and occasionally the thighs though.

Thanks! Not sure why I thought that temperature just didn’t apply to salmonella, maybe just because it’s one of the things that hits the news when it happens.

Isn’t that the normal chicken cooking temp? I thought salmonella was exempt (for lack of a better term) from that rule.

They keep saying their ai features will be opt-in, and yet everything they’ve rolled out so far is opt-out. I struggle to believe future ‘features’ will be any different. Maybe it’s opt-in in the sense that I’m not required to click whichever button activates it, like whatever they added to the context menu, but that’s not really what opt-in means and degrades my trust in Mozilla.

I’m also frustrated by their seeming inability to focus on their core browser product and building a popular competitor to chromium browsers instead of going off on side quests.

Goddamnit, their big packs of chicken breasts are a staple in my diet. Guess I’ll have to buy elsewhere unless there’s a way to identify where a package came from.

Ngl, read this as cojones and was super confused

You asked, and I gave my opinion. All this AI bullshit has done and continues to do significant damage to the global economy and ecology, god forbid I have a problem with that or any company contributing to it.

The problem is that they’re pushing it without any way for those of us who really don’t want that crap to strip it out of the browser. I don’t want all this ai garbage, never asked for it, and am harassed at every corner by every fucking company thinking it’s somehow going to change the world.

Sure, Mozilla allows you to turn off some of these features, but I’ve already had it reenabled in updates after previously disabling it. Further, many of the settings are buried in about:config, which is not a user-friendly way to make those changes. At best, these functionalities should be opt-in and presented as addons that can be installed, rather than being a core part of the browser that cannot be removed.

Open source typically means that the code is public and comes with extensive freedoms to use, modify, and distribute (the degree to which these are allowed is governed by the software license).

Source available, on the other hand, generally means that the code is publicly available for review but is otherwise proprietary and/or restricts the freedoms that an open source project provides.

The differences are more nuanced than the above summary might suggest, as they come from different philosophies on what open source should mean and how people should be able to interact with and use open source projects.

Ah, any developer who suggested that probably got the same answer I get at work: “Testing costs money, so unless we absolutely have to, no.”

That’s fair. I’m certainly not one to defend msoft, nor do I really have the technical knowledge to rebut. Is it possible that ‘trying’ the driver as you suggested could damage the drive or corrupt data? Just wondering if there’s a legitimate reason they wouldn’t go for a seemingly easy win aside from being a generally dumb organization.

Using this driver, however, is fraught with risks. Not all NVMe SSDs support it, and if incompatible, it could break Windows 11 boot.

Probably why it isn’t standard, especially since there’s a driver that does work even if it’s suboptimal.

Apps on my phone have a one-strike rule: the moment they send me an ad or otherwise annoy me, notifications are disabled and I reevaluate whether I need that app installed in the first place.

Whole foods -> Whole paycheck

Yes, let’s give the group that has extensive abuse and corruption issues with nigh zero accountability new ways to hurt people.

If anything, we should be advocating against remote vehicle control for the myriad security and safety issues that would introduce.

The default (at least in most of the US) is to treat a malfunctioning light as an all-way stop sign, with traffic alternating in each direction. The waymos instead stopped and blocked intersections, failing to reach the basic expectation for human drivers. Should we not hold these machines to a higher standard, if not at least the same standard as human drivers? Self-driving vehicles are supposed to be safer and ‘better’ than human drivers.

I feel that. I got a 50" 4k Sceptre from walmart maybe 4 or 5 years ago that has absolutely no smart features. They’ll have to pry that out of my cold, dead hands before I consider ‘upgrading’ to a so-called smart tv.