Any virtual keyboard / on-screen keyboard recommendations for Gnome (Wayland) users? The default one doesn't support X11/XWayland apps, which unfortunately is most of them...
@Excigma I can swipe up to force the keyboard to appear, but pressing the keys does nothing in X11 apps (which use XWayland under Wayland), like Chromium browsers or KeepassXC
Hi! I sincerely want to thank you for your well thought out response. I apologize if the word troll came off wrong. I probably should have used a better descriptor. My primary goal was to be a voice FOR enterprise distros at home - because I saw mostly posts from people who probably aren’t professional sysadmins and have never even tried an enterprise distro.
I fully concede on the VERY new hardware being a challenge for RHEL, an Ubuntu LTS or similar. I’m unfortunately not in a situation where I can afford that problem (kids and daycare costs) so it’s fallen off my radar. I do occasionally run into it at work with research groups that just buy the latest/fastest gaming hardware without checking with IT (we would generally steer them towards workstation/data center grade hardware instead of gaming hardware…not applicable to this discussion for home use). If somehow I could acquire something with new enough hardware to have that problem I’d probably use Fedora on it (so I could just modify my Ansible to work with both), and wait for current Fedora to become RHEL and then that hardware would become RHEL for the rest of it’s lifetime. Mainly - the huge number of constant updates and the every 6 month big updates on Fedora are just too much hassle for me.
On gaming and the other comparisons about improvements on newer packages: I do agree with you. My personal approach has just moved to use what is “tried and tested” and “good enough”. It’s a pretty common approach for sysadmins to let other early adopters find all of the bugs in new stuff. For example: I’m excited about bcachefs, but when I installed Fedora Rawhide just to test it after the recent 6.7 release - I found it largely NOT ready for anything I would need to trust (commands that return the console, but no indication that they did nothing for example - doesn’t give me a good feeling about putting all of my family photos on it until it matures). For now, I’ll still use XFS for small systems and ZFS for large systems or where I need send/receive.
All of that said: I acknowledge these are preferences and my approach, not a " right" way. I do still think it’s a valid approach for some who wants less updates and a more stable config if they’re happy with “fast enough” and less potential for update breakage.
Thank you again for being respectful and detailed in your response. Cheers!
is a booster-bot not really of linux, I would say ANTI-LINUX, and promotes constantly marketing by 3-4 corporations that seek to dominate linux and displace all alternatives.
The majority of people speak of junk/fast food 3 brands of soda, 2, 3 brands of coffee/tea, 2 brnands of tropical fruit ,3 brands of power-drinks, 3 brands of beer,
as nutrition, 2 brands of phone OSs, and it is all crap if not bad for you.
So what is your point?
What is popular is what has been marketed, and it is usually both dominant and a very poor alternative to what it sells for.
You should just block 99% of Linux insistence if you’re that butt hurt over what’s popular.
Also, the Linux community consistently doesn’t give a rats ass about marketing, we only care about what works.
@krisfreedain@linux
I started from Ubuntu in high school and it felt bloated. I moved to Void which was nice, but not really supported in general. I started recommending Fedora to beginners but started using Alpine as my daily driver. Don't think I will ever move from Alpine, but maybe I will recommend something other than Fedora in the future.
Don‘t want to dig up old posts, but wanted to update you since you took quite some time trying to help - it works now! I replaced the MoBo and everything works no smoothly on the new MoBo!
Thanks again so so much for the very appreciated help!
The problem isn’t that Bitcoin uses a lot of energy. The problem is that people never consider that energy use in context. Yet any headline about Bitcoin and energy never provides that context, because they are essentially hit pieces designed to elicit anger and clicks. Instead, we have to ask: What does that energy get us? How does that energy use compare to the energy used by other systems which perform the same function? A car which gets 10 miles per gallon would have been a fantastic use of energy in 1953, but today it is seen as wasteful. It does the same underlying thing, but the context matters.
Historically, our currencies have been based on incredibly inequitably distributed resources: precious metals and stable governance. Bitcoin is based on energy, which is the most equitably distributed resource on the planet. It literally falls from the sky, it runs through every river and every gust of wind and is found in the earth’s crust as uranium. Sometimes we get energy from unsustainable places, it sucks that any industry (including Bitcoin) uses it. That is a policy and governance problem, not a problem of our monetary system. You should know that Bitcion miners flock to renewable energy sources and over-provisioned grids. Why? Because they need the cheapest energy possible, which tends to come from renewables. Bitcoin miners are “buyers of last resort”, if there was anybody else to buy that energy, they would have bought it, and miners would have been outbid, because miners can’t afford to pay high energy prices as they must compete with every other miner on the planet. This is why Bitcoin mines typically don’t operate during peak demand hours, which is where most fossil fuels are used. Bitcoin, as “buyers of last resort” can be a part of the green revolution, they make it easier for governments to invest in and over-provision renewable infrastructure, and they make that green energy cheaper for everybody else by ensuring that at least someone will buy it during times of low demand. The problem with renewables is that they produce all day whereas people only actually want energy a few times a day.
Energy use is critical for the security of the Bitcoin network. While schemes that don’t use energy have been proposed, they all suffer from some serious trade-offs that make them unsuitable if we are going to build a global reserve currency, including a tendency to cause centralization and to reward the system’s richest participants. If a way is found to avoid using energy while still providing the same level of security and decentralization, Bitcoin is absolutely capable of upgrading its own network to use that new way.
First, let’s look at what Bitcoin does in exchange for that energy: Bitcoin is an economic network that can be accessed by anybody with a cellphone and a halfway reliable internet connection including the billions of people, with a B, who are “unbanked” because they lack access to stable banking infrastructure. It enables anybody (with Bitcoin lightning) to send money internationally in under a second for pennies in fees. Having a settlement time for transactions of basically zero means that in an economy money can move faster. That means increased efficiency for any industry including the banking industry. It also offers us a way to opt out of an unsustainable inflationary currency environment, that is valuable to people as well. Constantly increasing the supply of money robs the money of value, it hurts the lower and middle classes the most. Bank runs happen, and banks are “too big to fail”, so we have to bail them out, which is how the 99% end up paying for the investment risks of the 1%, the system is deeply flawed. But there is no solution to the bailout problem, if our entire economy will collapse if we don’t do the bailout, we have to do the bailout, right?
Second, let’s look at how much energy that takes. Bitcoin currently does this with less than 1% of global electricity usage. Even if it doesn’t replace banking entirely, even if it only replaces remittance services (think PayPal, Western Union, etc). Think of every Western Union kiosk, branch, etc in the entire globe. Think of their lights, their servers, their call centers. How much energy is that? How much energy is used by SWIFT? PayPal? When you start adding these up, you find that we use well over this amount of electricity on remittance services. And we’re not just waiting electricity and earth’s resources, we’re wasting the most valuable assets of all: time and human capital. We don’t need people manually sending bank wires like it’s 1910. We can have those people doing more valuable jobs.
Bitcoin’s market cap is around 850 billion right now. That is bigger than the entire GDP of Sweden or Israel or Vietnam, it’s in the top 25 countries by GDP. It transfers trillions of dollars of transactions every year. The average trend, year on year, is wider adoption and growth. It solves real problems and people recognize it and use it for that purpose. That’s why big banks, hedge funds, and others invest in it.
There is also the wider discussion to be had about predicating our economies on currencies which grow to infinity and how that may not be a sustainable strategy on a planet with non-infinite resources. A currency which is constantly losing value incentivizes people to spend even if they don’t actually need anything, because the currency is going to become worthless given enough time. This means more production is paid for than we actually need. More resources get used up. A deflationary currency, on the other hand, incentivizes the opposite. In a deflationary economic system, somebody producing a good or service must do more to make you want to buy it. In that environment, might products be more reliable? More repairable? Might they be built more sustainably? One can only speculate, but I personally feel positive about the knock-on effects of moving off an inflationary currency system.
Zorin OS 17 isn’t going to dethrone Linux Mint any time soon. I wish they switched to following Ubuntu LTS releases instead of being on their own timeline. 22.04 package base is going to be 2 years old by the time this releases.
They obviously spent a lot of time on aesthetics and simplicity which seems to be the main appeal of the distribution.
At work, I have to run a command in an AWS instance. In that particular instance only exists the root user. The command should not be executed with root privileges (it executes mpirun, which is not recommended to run as sudo or the machine might break), so I was wondering if there is a way to block or disable the sudo privileges while the command is running. As mentioned, the only user existing there is root, so I suppose "sudo -u" is not an option.
It’s not that an Amazon instance can be a docker container. It was more that the behavior you are describing is extremely odd for a full Linux environment but normal for a docker container.
If you created the instance, it isn’t likely a container. But it also sounds like the base image might be poorly set up
You’ll thank yourself for it later. Things like this take a little longer up front but putting them off has a way of making you have to work around it again and again until, when you get around to correcting it, it takes far more time to undo the workarounds than it would’ve taken to correct it the first time.
Looking to dip my toes into Linux for the first time. I have a 2016 Intel MacBook Pro with pretty solid specs collecting dust right now that I think I’m going to use. Research so far has indicated to me that the two best options for me are likely Mint or Elementary OS. Does anyone have any insight? Also open to other OS’s. I would consider myself decently tech savvy but I am not a programmer or anything. Comfortable dipping into the terminal when the need arises and all that.
Mint is full easy-mode. Definitely try that for your first. You can even run it off the USB as a live distro and get a feel for it. Go for the Gnome desktop version, it is prettier than XFCE, just a little heavier.
Mess around with that, break it, fix it, have fun.
I've been trying to solve a problem with my arch (endeavour) instalation and wanted to know if anyone here can help
Everything is working well, excepting the WiFi connection. It is extremely slow, sometimes disconnecting from the network, and in the task bar, the WiFi icon shows that the signal strength is weak, although the router is in the same room. Switching between r8168 and r8169 as recommended doesnt work. Any ideas?
@Rustmilian@linux Yeah, it's close to impossible to find documentation on what to do here. I'm trying to find out how is it that Fedora works well with the same hardware, and even considering changing the card itself, but for the moment at least my connection is much more stable after setting the iwlwifi.conf file
Once again, thank you for your help!
It’s not OP’s fault, but voting is how we’re supposed to curate content. This post doesn’t have a title or description so it’s a bad post on lemmy and I think downvoting it is acceptable. Don’t consider votes a reflection of a user’s value or standing
Snapper offers basically the same functionality as Timeshift and is -to my knowledge- developed by openSUSE’s team. So, while finding it therefore pre-configured on say openSUSE Tumbleweed makes sense, it’s also the preferred solution on some other distros like Garuda Linux, Siduction and Spiral Linux.
@linux I was able to install Keyscape on Ubuntu Studio, but the GUI won't work in the standalone or VST. Does anyone know how to resolve this? Should be similar if anyone has encountered this with Omnisphere
Meshtastic just forwards your requests through other peoples devices until it gets where it needs. It acts as a big repeater system. I haven’t experimented with it much outside of just sending messages. I think you are able to transfer actual small files but that’s the limits.