My argument is not targeting people who pretty much don’t have a choice.

It’s that those who can afford a choice, and sometimes even complain they’d rather support green/fair/local businesses… they aren’t ready to pay the greater prices for those products. They want green/fair/local but cheaper than amazon, that’s never going to happen.

The problem is that users are reluctant to pay more for the same product.

In my country the difference in price for a dozen eggs laid by free vs caged chicken is 1 euro. The caged chicken live their entire life in an overpopulated cage and are never allowed to walk outside. People don’t care, they’d rather save 1 euro.

Companies like Fairphone seem to advocate for the values you describe but they can’t possibly provide the same price of those other “dirty” companies. While most people sees the benefit and appreciates the values of such a product, they just aren’t willing to pay more for an inferior product spec wise.

This is what’s so great about Linux, you can use whatever the hell you want.

Flatpaks provide some cool security functionalities like revoking network access to a specific application. Maybe you care about this, maybe you don’t.

My personal policy is to always install from the repos. Occasionally something is only available in flathub, which is fine for me. I really understand how hard is maintaining something for every single package manager and diatributions and totally respect the devs using a format that just works everywhere. If I were to release a new Linux app, I would totally use flatpak.

You can use any firefox fork on Linux and any other firefox fork on Android. They sync fine.

Different people deal with things in different ways. Some (most?) people feel like learning linux is undesirable or a chore, while others embrace the sense of discovery and exploring a new and exciting thing. After using Windows for decades I don’t want the same experience, I want something completely different.

Before I installed Linux I played a bunch on a virtual machine. I installed several distributions, desktop environments, hardware compatibility. I ended up landing on EndeavourOS more than a year ago. Never borked my setup, never had update problems, never had a problem I couldn’t solve (more like Arch Wiki solving it for me).

I like to learn things by doing things, I like to fail fast and learn from the mistakes. EndeavourOS provided the exact experience I was looking for and would recommend it to someone with a similar mentality. I wouldn’t recommend Arch (or arch based distros) to people who aren’t tech savy, but people make it seem more complicated and brittle than it actually is.

I’d just like to vent that these kind of discussions are one of the big turnoffs of the Linux community in general. People speak “in absolutes”.

You either do it this way or you’re a dumbass. You either use the distribution I like or you’re doing it WRONG. You shouldn’t use Arch because you’re not experienced enough, you should use Mint for an arbitrary amount of time before you graduate to the good stuff.

You friends get way too worked up over other people’s personal preferences and push your biased and subjective views as facts.

Is Arch Linux the right fit for a newbie to Linux? The right answer is “it depends”, not “never”. Would I recommend Arch to my mom? No. Would I recommend it to my programmer colleague who already lives in the Powershell? Sure, why not.

Check out keyd, it’s very powerful.

The only thing I miss from Windows is Voicemeeter. God, I loved that thing. I miss it so much.

Handling the audio and adding what were once simple things like noise supression has been a really really shit experience.

Why so you care so much about point 6? Feels like overkill.

It’s like going to a vegan community saying “meat isn’t so bad”. You’re obviously not going to get good responses.

I use freerdp with Wayland, works OK.

You wish. Most tech companies will get you the cheapest laptop they can get away with.

I remember being denied a 64bit laptop when developing a 64bit only application lol.

I have several clients with this kind of setup. I’m always baffled at the amount of hoops I have to go through to connect to my Linux server. Sometimes I have to remote desktop to a windows virtual desktop and then use the citrix session to another windows machine VIA BROWSER so I can finally ssh to the machine. Are they trying to bore attackers to death?

It’s a gigantic money sink, it’s going to be extremely hard to come up with a profitable (or break even) alternative.

I stopped using LinkedIn because it totally turned into Facebook. Everyone is just posting memes, motivation quotes or soccer.

Nah, your ISP doesn’t give you enough bandwidth to host your own mini YouTube. You vastly underestimate the bandwidth required to run the service. It’s massive, which is why PeerTube is having a hard time gaining traction.

Serious question: how can YouTube pay the bills with zero ads? I’m not talking about making a profit, just breaking even.

Except content creators want to create content, not maintain an instance.

Switching to more private and less data hungry services is a tough process. How private do you want to be? If you take it too far, you won’t have a cell phone or a bank account.

Carefully consider the changes you are willing make right now. Start small, progress slowly. Don’t get discouraged and remember that total privacy doesn’t exist.

Start by swapping search engine, don’t use Google or Bing. That’s an easy goal that already makes a big difference. Use something like Duck duck go, Startpage or something like that.

Eventually move away from gmail. Get your own domain, create your own email address. Slowly migrate your important accounts to the new email. This can take time but it’s not hard and you just removed the 2 largest sources of data from Google.

Stop using Chrome, try Firefox. Personally recommend LibreWolf, a Firefox fork. At the very least move to Brave browser (but make sure you disable the crypto crap). Most extensions exist in both browsers this should easy.

Eventually consider moving to Linux but don’t rush it. Study what apps you need, what alternatives are there in Linux. Expect a way worse user experience but a way way better ownership. Try in a VM or live environment before you even consider installing it for real.

Just go ahead and write a very basic working kernel in rust.

I don’t get this stance, really. If I want to write a driver in Rust I should start by creating a completely new Kernel and see if it gains momentum? The idea of allowing Rust in kernel drivers is to attract new blood to the project, not to intentionally divert it to a dummy project.

Rust is sufficiently different that you cannot expect C developers to learn rust to the level they have mastered C

If you watch the video, no one asked anything from the C developers other than documentation. They just want to know how to correctly make the Rust bindings.

Note that Rust is not replacing C code in the Kernel, just an added option to writing drivers.