• 0 Posts
  • 67 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 5th, 2025

help-circle

  • So, there is some aggravation (not really a con) in terms of package management systems.

    You have MANY options not limited to your standard repo tools like yum, pacman, apt, etc. You also have 3rd party ones like flatpak and snap. You could also throw in the AppImage format to that. Arch has the AUR on top of that which usually means you’re running paru or yay. And then you have things like brew and crates which you might run into.

    Working in any of these is straightforward, the problem comes from having to manage them all independently of one another at the same time. Pacman will update standard repo, but not AUR. Paru will update standard repo and AUR, but that doesn’t help with flatpak/snap. Then docker/pods/lxc are in their own little world while you get those handled.

    In the end, the more complex you build a system the more complex it is to manage, but it still is an aggravation. I’d still take it over the one-size fits all approach Microsoft has, though.


  • But did you RTFM?

    I used Arch for ~15 years before switching my daily driver to NixOS. In that entire time, I never once posted a question to the forums. The wiki is that well constructed.

    If you do post a question without searching first (that’s a big no no), they will link to you the exact steps from the wiki to use. They might treat you badly at that point, but in a way you would have been treating the community as a personal assistant to look up things for you which I would say is equally bad.







  • edit2: thanks again everyone, you don’t need to check if it’s working. apparently I’m blocked from accessing the site, can’t see any other explanation. DNS resolves fine, flushed caches, tried private mode, clear cookies, tried everything on my end to rule stuff out, nothing

    You might run traceroutes/mtr to see where exactly this is failing. Here’s the IP I show in case yours differs:

      ~ dig freedns.afraid.org @10.10.0.1 A
    
    ; <<>> DiG 9.20.23 <<>> freedns.afraid.org @10.10.0.1 A
    ;; global options: +cmd
    ;; Got answer:
    ;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 51734
    ;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1
    
    ;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
    ; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 1232
    ;; QUESTION SECTION:
    ;freedns.afraid.org.		IN	A
    
    ;; ANSWER SECTION:
    freedns.afraid.org.	60	IN	A	69.42.215.252
    
    ;; Query time: 206 msec
    ;; SERVER: 10.10.0.1#53(10.10.0.1) (UDP)
    ;; WHEN: Wed Jun 03 14:48:58 CDT 2026
    ;; MSG SIZE  rcvd: 63
    




  • I remember the WoW killer spree. If nothing else we got a lot of fun games to play for awhile. That’s kinda like saying you’re going to take down a giant whale by creating a larger whale. It’s just self-defeating to approach it like that.

    But I was referring to it as a “WoW Clause” in that subscription based games like WoW aren’t subject to this new law. The law makers carved out a nice little safe space for Blizzard to operate in. And I don’t think subscription models are as profitable as other models (again a plus for Blizzard to remove competition as they have it working). You can still make money from them, but people would rather have F2P with cash shop or sell their data so they don’t have a recurring bill.


  • (1)Any subscription-based service that advertises or offers for sale access to any digital game solely for the duration of the subscription.

    I feel like this is the “WoW Clause”. I can see a lot of games going to subscription based models now. Since you can’t just “patch in” private servers, I could see games like PUBG/Fortnite/etc having to go this route.

    But they could also just refund the game… that being $0 if there is no purchase price:

    ©A refund in an amount equal to the full purchase price paid for the digital game by the purchaser.

    Bill: https://calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org/bills/ca_202520260ab1921

    EDIT: I think it will be challenged either way if passed, and I will bet the ESA uses the First Amendment: Code as Protected Speech argument established in the San Bernadino case between the FBI and Apple.