Yeah, it might be easy to install but you are also a beta tester of things that will be in more stable distros two years from now.
But with that said, I love Fedora, but with Gnome. I use Nobara for the gaming simplicity but with the vanilla Gnome spin. I’d recommend it to anyone, most Linux distros these days are pretty user friendly once installed.
I’m playing BG3 on Linux on a laptop with integrated graphics, and I haven’t had any issues other than not being able to run it with graphics set to ultra (expected since there’s not graphics card).
Yeah, and lots of new popular indie games. Some recent oneish I’ve got are DREDGE, Rimworld and Stardew Valley. OK not super recent but not all the games are 20 years old or more. Even Skyrim Anniversary is on there.
GoG does DRM free, and not just old games. Not many new AAA because convincing a big company to sell their game DRM free is hard, but Baldur’s Gate 3 is on there.
Unfortunately they don’t take requests for new subreddits anymore. In addition, they don’t mirror comments so in terms of answers to questions it’s probably not that helpful.
It looks like if you enter an “Other” option, it adds it to the list for others to select. Some troll must have added the others you can see on the results page they are marked as “(Other)”.
It looks like if you enter an “Other” option, it adds it to the list for others to select. Some troll must have added the others you can see on the results page they are marked as “(Other)”.
Yep, definitely. That’s the allure. From what I can tell, it’s likely there are tens of thousands of people making over $1m a year. However, there are hundreds of millions of people uploading videos.
Most people won’t make much at all, but if you don’t have the people at the top making millions then no one has any incentive, so those people are critical.
There are lots of peertube instances. The issue is that YouTube uses ads to pay content creators, and so everyone puts their content on YouTube in the hope of becoming the next big thing.
As another poster alluded to, digital goods aren’t really considered property in the traditional sense. Digital property is protected under copyright (and other IP laws). The owner could sell the game, but then they wouldn’t own it anymore (e.g. when one game studio buys another, they are buying the games as well). Instead, they grant a licence to use the game, which is how Steam works as well.
If Steam let you transfer your account to someone else (e.g. bequeath or sell it), then they would need this in the licence (which they could do in theory). Other than the logistics of that (especially how to handle people selling accounts - and the scammers that inevitably come with that), the AAA publishers are unlikely to agree to those terms. Ultimately the Steam licence is likely a compromise between Steam’s vision and all the AAA publishers that wouldn’t publish on Steam if they didn’t get the licence they wanted. A bit like how Netflix doesn’t really care if you use a VPN, they just have to enforce it so studios will let them use their content.
Is this any different from selling an account, which I presume you’re not allowed to do?
In the official announcement, they have very carefully and deliberately avoided the term “open source”.
“Open source” has a very specific meaning, and probably the key part for this is if there are any restrictions on what you do with any derivative software you create.
Can you use the Winamp source code to create a new media player and sell it? If there is say a restriction on if you can use it in a company or on if you can sell it, then it’s not “open source” even though you can publish noncommercial software based on it.
The Winamp announcement linked to in the article never says “Open source”, that’s the article writer not understanding the difference.
What’s the licence? It doesn’t sound like “open source” and sounds more like “source available”.
I don’t know about that guy but you can’t even get cheque books in NZ anymore. They were phased out, mostly because electronic payments are ubiquitous and most places already stopped accepting cheques a decade or two back.
I have a great technique for this.
First, pick some to do software. Start adding things as you remember them, and ticking them off as you do the. Soon you will find you are adding things to the list much faster than you are ticking them off!
Now here’s the trick: find some new to do software, and start adding your to dos to that one instead! Ignore the previous list.
Repeat! It’s like magic!
Oh for sure. I don’t think this advice applies to projects that already have a following. But many, perhaps most, projects don’t have much of a following even if you intended for others to use it. If you have a pet project that a reasonably small number of users, you might find you get occasional pull requests but they never meet the code standards, or you ask for changes but they never happen and the pull request sits there, or you reject them because you wouldn’t have structured it like that - well consider accepting the pull request and merging as is. Then you can follow up with changes to fix code quality with your own changes.
This approach shows you appreciate the contribution, even though it’s not perfect. If you find the same person contributing often but making the same errors, then for sure mention it in a way that’s easy for them to understand how to resolve it. But if you’re rigid then you probably won’t get so many contributions as people will think they aren’t up to your standards.
I’d also argue that merging then fixing up yourself later would be more time efficient than reviewing code and providing feedback on changes to be made 😆
Beta is the wrong word, but there is quite a difference in stability between Fedora and Debian.