Arch is fairly easy in my experience to install. I did install in manually once and that took a while but wasn’t difficult.

Since then I’ve just connected to WiFi then just run the arch install script which is prepackaged in the ISO now.

Actually using it has had minimal issues except for the time I didn’t use the machine it was on for a few months and couldn’t get it to update because the signing keys for stuff was out of date. That and an issue with running out of memory when trying to compile a browser from the AUR (I just installed it through flatpack instead).

They do have their own App Store, it’s just only got like… 14 apps in it. Mostly just the stuff they’ve made them selves that they’re super confident in the security of, as well as a couple of other app stores like Accrescent

To start allowing submissions of any third party app to it would ether require them to do a ton of vetting to ensure it meets their standards, or for them to drop the standards for security and privacy for it. If you want more than that handful of defaults, Accrescent and the google play mirror are there ready to be installed

so, Linux does work, a lot of stuff works. There is nothing fundamentally different about phones other than them basically all running on ARM instead of x86, which is more common for PCs. More development of stuff for X86 Linux than ARM Linux, although less of a difference than there use to be.

Really the issue is proprietary stuff built on top of android and IOS. Stuff that a lot of useful apps rely on for security and functionality. For instance banking apps are super locked down for obvious reasons, but the standards that have been adopted by the industry for mobile banking are all entangled with proprietary close source stuff.

“No! We swear we can make money! Seee! Phone? Phone make money! We make phone! Please give us more money to throw in to the money shredder.”

Exactly, this is the problem. This is anticompetitive behavior.

It’s not anti competitive if it is litterlay also what all the competitors are doing, and have been doing since the very dawn of digital markets for software. It also dubious if they could legally even set up such interoperability even if they wanted to, as it could potentially violate parts of the DMCA.

They’re not doing anything to destroy their competitors, they’re not a monopolist, and the repeated failures of court cases against them all over the world shows that. There are a few on going cases against them, but, there are far far more cases that have already finished that failed to show any monopoly seeking behavior.

Public companies do not actually have a legal obligation to maximize shareholder value. That is a myth based on a misreading of the Dodge V Ford decisions. That specific reading of the precedent of that decisions has never actually been used in a court case to charge a CEO.

The difference was that people pretended like Google ever had an option to “not be evil”. At the end of the day, they were a publicly traded company, and thus, line must go up, or else the collective hive mind of the public market would vote the leadership out and replace them.

Steam is private, thus, the current leaderships can ignore the demands of the public market hive mind. Private companies can be evil, but it depends on who owns them. They’re not guaranteed.

A monopoly is when all competitors have been destroyed, not when competitors aren’t particularly competitive. At least, under the letter of US law.

If they start being stupid, they’re suddenly on par with the competitors already being stupid. Suddenly they have viable competitors.

They do have competitors, they competitors just aren’t very popular. There is the colloquial definition of monopoly, and a different legal bar for being declared a monopolist under US law.

To be declared a monopolist requires that a company already has destroyed or is actively seeking to destroy competitors through anti competitive behavior. Even if people mix terms, the general idea is that they’re not doing anything unreasonable and anti-competitive to gain their position in the market. They have competitors, they’re just not popular, and steam has not done anything to make them unpopular.

The real danger is that if steam decided to suddenly start being externally anti consumer, like many of it’s competitors already are, it would be difficult for people to migrate away due to a lack of interoperability between services. Users can’t transfer licenses to play games between services, nor can they easily interact with social features on other platforms. But that’s not really steam’s fault, that’s how all the competitors (for the most part) work as well.

I mean, public companies have to chase the quarter, private companies don’t have to. Private is a curse and a blessing. It can be better because the ownership might be reasonable, or it could be worse because the owners are insane.

Public is predictable, for good and for ill. Private is a a wild card.

The only safe bet is worker owned.

I always say, people starting out should just go to mint. It’s the lowest friction option, and will work fine for just about every use case. Like, there is a whole world of cool stuff to try out, but that’s for after someone has an easy, stable and reliable experience. After they realized that Linux can work for just about anything, that’s the time to start messing about and trying out the more specific distros.

Damn, glad i don’t own a car and will never buy one.

I have 16 inch framework. I bought it fairly stripped down, only getting the parts I really needed for basic function as a laptop. I then bought additional parts as I had money for them and slotted them in. Made it a much more affordable purchase over all.

And… then I spilled water on the keyboard. Shut it down, pulled it apart a little, dried next to a fan for a bit. Water hadn’t gotten past the keyboard luckily, but the keyboard was only partly functional. I just got a new keyboard module, put it in my self, good as new. No sending out the whole computer, no getting told by the rep that the whole machine was broken and I had to buy a new one.

Payed for its self immediately that day as far as I’m concerned.

First of all, it’s a jackal girl.

Second, we wouldn’t need Anubis if it wasn’t for the hoard of scraping bots trying to copy every line of source code they can, to feed into LLM to be ground up and spat out as an attributionless mass of Frankenstein code.

Would they rather it be a soulless corporate logo? A flat two tone rounded corner letter on a square?

They take on issues that are problematic for the party’s image, if they’re not problematic for the party they let it thrive. Outside that narrow window, china’s internet is even more of a Skinner box, addiction suck, dystopian corporate hellscape than the English speaking internet.

I assure you, the Chinese internet is not a picknick, it’s got plenty of its own wackos and weird shit going on. But the party is very quick to shut down stuff that it sees as a potential image problem, but they won’t do shit about a problem until it becomes a significant embracement.

Probably not with SARH, multiple emitter sources would just complicate the job of the detector on the missile. Like I’m sure it could be made to work with a bit of compensation, but it would add cost and complexity to the seeker on the missile, which sort of defeats the point of such a system being cheap and easy to build. There’s also the Possibility that the returns would be too diffuse for a detector on the missile to track beyond that 20km range, so having additional sets beyond that range wouldn’t help. Probably easier and cheaper just increase the range of a single radar. Just putting the whole set on a really big missile and making it an active radar homing system might make sense with an array of sets providing warning and an initial vector, and the missile guiding it’s self in, but again, now your missile is the cost of at least one set per launch.

Not sure what limits the range on this set, but they mention a wave guide improving it, which makes me think it’s just a power limitation on the emitter or limited sensitivity on the receiver.

It depends on the system, often times they’ll have additional guidance assistance, such as an infrared seeker or some inertial posturing system. SARH just means the main guidance is provided by a seeker picking up radar from a external emitter painting the target. As supposed to ARH (active radar homing) where the missile has its own emitter and detector. Most systems aren’t just one thing these days, for the sake of redundancy and error correction.

Nah, that missile was visual tracking. Not radar guided. Also, way too small to intercept anything going high and fast which is generally what the patriot is for. Intercepting an aircraft requires a really powerful motor to give it enough speed and altitude to catch a plane.

This radar could maybe be used with a semi active radar guided missile, where the ground radar lights up the target and the missile just has a detector that homes in on that, which is what early patriots used. But it’s only got a 20km range which isn’t really enough for an anti aircraft system, unless all you’re worried about is something slow and low to the ground like a helicopter or cesna. Need enough time for the radar to detect, identify and lock the target, fire the missile, and have it track to the target, and something moving fast and high will be in and out of the range of the radar before all that can be done. Especially if the target is high up at 10km, which would half the effective range.