cmhe

I found the main issue with many non-rolling release distributions are the upgrade instructions from one stable release to the next, and not the difficulty of installing them.

I'm myself a Archlinux guy, but that does sometimes require some carefulness and regularly (at least weekly) applying updates and does not have stable automatic updates, so I started installing Fedora atomic desktop distributions (Fedora Silverblue/Kinolite/etc.) for people that just want to use their device for basic stuff.

The reason for that is long term maintainability without an expert at hand.

I had so many bad experiences updating distributions from one stable version to the next, be it Debian and Ubuntu-based, or Fedora-based distributions.

And with those atomic desktop distributions the amount of moving parts is much lower, so hopefully upgrading them to newer releases is much more stable.

So I would suggest giving Fedora Silverblue (Gnome desktop), Kinolite (KDE) or Budgie Edition a try.

Yes, but only in one direction and if you use UDP instead of TCP. Also your MTU needs to be small enough for the packages to fit between the blades of the fan, otherwise that causes package fragmentation.

/s

I spend a lot more money on good Ethernet switches. But at least that works and is easier to manage than Wifi.

If vendors are either forced by law to keep every device they produce up to date with security fixes, until is patents and copyright expires, or have to allow end users to install any alternative software, without loosing any features advertised and provided by the hardware. I would be fine with that compromise.

Yes! I think part of the right to repair is the ability to install your own software on devices you own, when the vendor stops fixing it.

Maga-Communism is a thing for a while: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jackson_Hinkle

When we are talking about laws, yes you are right.

I was arguing more about developers not releasing the source code on their own, when they stopped releasing patches, or even remove the game from stores or shutdown servers, while stating that reason: "We cannot because we use third-party stuff."

No, they just do not want to. They might even think that their past games are in competition to their current games. So they do not want people to play (and improve/mod) them anymore.

This argument seems hollow, releasing source code is not an all or nothing situation. They can just release what they are allowed to, and let the community replace the missing stuff.

Releasing anything is better than releasing nothing and letting the community reverse engineer everything instead of just some third-party libraries.

The best and only way to get at the mega corporations causing all the climate change is to boycott them.

Sorry to say this, but these boycotts rarely do anything. If enough people would boycott some company, or business practice to matter only a little bit, then there also would be enough people to effect politics to try to get better regulation in place, via electoralism, direct action of just getting actively involved in politics.

Yeah, it seems to be a misunderstanding. They are using cloud tools to generate and update the base operating system.

"Better" is always relative. Personally I generally prefer not to use software that comes bundled with the hardware, that way I avoid any vendor lock in. The hardware vendor should not be in a position of deciding what I should or shouldn't be able to do with their hardware, and software should be open to the customer, so that it does exactly what they want, not more or less.

Sure.

Valve can do a lot more, but what is more concerning to me is if they are actively consumer unfriendly. There is a difference between passively allowing bad stuff to happen, and actively doing bad stuff.