And it’s still entirely unrelated to my point, since SUSE will remain the trademark in question regardless of what’s actually contained in OpenSUSE.

But yes, the free/open-source spins of things tend to have somewhat differing content compared to the commercial offering, usually for licensing or support reasons.
E.g. CentOS (when it still was a real thing)/AlmaLinux/etc supporting hardware that regular RHEL has dropped support for, while also not distributing core RedHat components like the subscription manager.

Not at all what my point was. There’s indeed plenty of Open-something (or Libre-something) projects under the sun, but no free/open spins of commercial projects named simply “Open<Trademarked company name / commercial offering>”.

To be fair, OpenSUSE is the only project with a name like that, so it makes some sense that they’d want it changed.
There’s no OpenRedHat, no OpenNovell, no OpenLinspire, etc.

Well, one available case you can look at is Uru: Live / Myst Online, currently running under the name Myst Online: Uru Live: Again.

They open-sourced their Dirt/Headspin/Plasma engine, which required stripping out - among other things - the PhysX code from it.

Seems to work with my personal setup at least, with two libraries - the default on ~/.local/share/steam, and one on /mnt/storage/steam - and Stardew Valley installed in the secondary storage library

Factorio is great, I’m also a fan of X4.

Both the rendezvous/mailbox and transport servers are available under an MIT license, though not every client makes it easy to use your own rendezvous.

I personally use the rymdport GUI client and the rust CLI.

In general, browser benchmarks seem to often favor Firefox in terms of startup and first interaction timings, and often favor Chrome when it comes to crunching large amounts of data through JavaScript.
I.e. for pages which use small amounts of JavaScript, but call into it quickly after loading, Firefox tends to come out on top. But for pages which load lots of JavaScript and then run it constantly, Chrome tends to come out on top.

We’re usually talking milliseconds-level of difference here though. So if you’re using a mobile browser or a low-power laptop, then the difference is often not measurable at all, unless the page is specifically optimized for one or the other.

There’s a bunch of extensions that allow you to switch user-agent easily, I personally use this one, it includes a list of known strings to choose between as well.

They used to also use the unreleased version 0 of shadow DOM for building the Polymer UI, which - being a Chrome-only prototype - understandably didn’t work on Firefox, and therefore instead used a really slow Javascript polyfill to render its UI.

I haven’t checked on it lately, but I imagine they must’ve changed at least that by now.

One thing you can test is to apply a Chrome user-agent on Firefox when visiting YouTube. In my personal experience that actually noticeably improves the situation.

The EU AI act classifies AI based on risk (in case of mistakes etc), and things like criminality assessment is classed as an unacceptable risk, and is therefore prohibited without exception.

There’s a great high level summary available for the act, if you don’t want to read the hundreds of pages of text.

They couldn’t possibly do that, the EU has banned it after all.

Well, things like the fact that snap is supposed to be a distro-agnostic packaging method despite being only truly supported on Ubuntu is annoying. The fact that its locked to the Canonical store is annoying. The fact that it requires a system daemon to function is annoying.

My main gripes with it stem from my job though, since at the university where I work snap has been an absolute travesty;
It overflows the mount table on multi-user systems.
It slows down startup a ridiculous amount even if barely any snaps are installed.
It can’t run user applications if your home drive is mounted over NFS with safe mount options.
It has no way to disable automatic updates during change critical times - like exams.

There’s plenty more issues we’ve had with it, but those are the main ones that keep causing us issues.
Notably Flatpak doesn’t have any of the listed issues, and it also supports both shared installations as well as internal repos, where we can put licensed or bulky software for courses - something which snap can’t support due to the centralized store design.

Especially if you - like Microsoft - consider “Unicode” to mean UTF-16 (or UCS-2) with a BOM.

Do you have WebP support disabled in your browser?

(Wasn’t aware my pict-rs was set to transcode to it, going to have to fix that)

I’m currently sitting with an Aura 15 Gen 2, and I’m definitely happy with it.
I do wish they’d get their firmware onto LVFS, but that’s about my main complaint.

The first official implementation of directly connecting WhatsApp to another chat system - using APIs built specifically for purpose instead of third-party bridges - was indeed done against the Matrix protocol, as part of a collaboration in testing ways to satisfy the interoperability requirements of the EU Digital Services Act.
So not a case of a third-party bridge trying to act as a WhatsApp client enough to funnel communication, but instead using an official WhatsApp endpoint developed - by them - explicitly for interoperation with another chat system.

I think the latest update on the topic is the FOSDEM talk that Matthew held this February.

Edit: It’s worth noting that the goal here is to even support direct E2EE communication between users of WhatsApp and Matrix, something that’s not likely to happen with the first consumer-available release.

Well, the first tests for interconnected communication with WhatsApp were done with Matrix, so that’s a safe bet.

Version requirements? No rules!