I have not used Ubuntu enough to say I have a bad experience with it. I know of Snap being effectively a proprietary store (a dumb feature) and Canonicals has a bad reputation for being like the Microsoft of GNU+Linux.

Linux Mint offers the pros of Ubuntu but with the cons of like-Microsoft decision removed, why would I consider Ubuntu?

CLA default has ground looking like this (from dwarf wiki):

I like to check an option that makes grass/dirt/sand look like dots. This is an old embark from pre-graphics update days (animals include cats, dogs, turkeys, a horse, wildebeest and an alpaca:

I’m not so sure it’s actually okay for manufactures to say using aftermarket parts voids the warranty - they need to prove it’s actually your fault the device is broken (America’s Magnuson–Moss Warranty Act). If you’ve seen those little stickers over screws that say “warranty void if removed” - those are actually illegal (in America).

You focus on an incompetent grandson hypothetical but it’s not as if the 1st party repair is immune from hiring people who can make negligent mistakes, or even take malicious acts. If it’s difficult to replace a seal on a mask then perhaps it’s a CRAP design.

Companies will preach safety when lobbying against right to repair but when a mask is forced to be recalled for sound/vibration dampening material entering people’s lung they will kick and scream.

Safety is not my main goal, it is the freedom to do what you want with what you paid for.

The FDA found there isn’t evidence that 3rd party repair is any less safe than 1st party repair.

If one part needs to be replaced and the company who owns the patients/copyright tells the manufacturer to not sell it to others then the patient cost is needlessly a whole new machine. How many lives would be saved by lowering cost of getting medical equipment working?

1. A person doesn’t need to study medicine or own surgical equipment to get their body repaired. Same logic applies for the repairing of their medical devices. Right to repair does mean you have to personally repair it.

2+3. I don’t think that’s a problem. Presumably they’re already in contact with others to share information. Do that but as part of a larger, more open community.

When a defibrillator implant incorrectly shocks a pregnant women as an edge case she has to take meds to slow her heart so it doesn’t shock her. Doctors never think of the software running on it, and can’t get the code because it’s proprietary. People would be able to fix it, perhaps without even removing it, but can’t because business. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=easb_6LCFDI

Thanks for the history and technical explanation. I didn’t mean to imply that was the origin (for computing) and was only talking about a specific usage of the word.

I think most people say it to refer to manufacture imposed limits but I wanted to promote a broader usage. That using proprietary software is like being in a jail because your software freedoms are denied.

In the medical field when a device can only be repaired by the manufacturer then you can expect long wait times, bad repair jobs and having your own equipment sent in for repair destroyed for “safety”.

We let people repair their own car’s brake pads… we shouldn’t give up ownership rights for a unwarranted claim to safety. If something is potentially dangerous then making it more difficult to repair is a bad idea.

The manufacture should have zero say if their product gets repaired or not. The only person who can give permission to repair it is the owner. It should be illegal to implement tying to lockout parts being used as a replacement. Right to repair

They call it jailbreak because this is an issue of freedom: software freedom

What’s the reason?

I mostly play ascii, CLA is a good middle ground for me.

Graphics for babies

Meaning babies will have graphics but what I read is that Dwarf Fortress will have graphics for baby players.

Nuance is the friend of truth. Some parts of EULAs may not be binding if they cross a line, dependent on what country’s laws apply and how the judge happens to rule in court.

deleted by creator

“What!? You don’t like the erosion of ownership rights? You’re an asshole!” - you.

I didn’t mean to imply charging additionally for the cheats. Is the state of the games industry so bad that was a reasonable assumption :(

I was thinking of dedicated servers aimed at attracting cheaters, and a server that encourages players to fight handicapped players (various levels of cheat users).

As a player I agree but as a software user and maker I don’t. Users should be in control of their own computing, therefore client-side anti-cheat is the unjust power over the user (edit, because it is proprietary).

Has anyone tried? As far as I know the most that has been done is to shadowban cheaters to their own servers for matchmaking. No one has tried having built-in multiplayer cheats to compete with 3rd party cheats.

As an adult you may notice you spend less time with your friends. So if you’ve tried that you’d know how sad it is when you can’t play games with your friends because of your values. When you care about video games then your interpretation of “the point” leaves a lot to be desired. I aspire for a better gaming industry.

I think Ubisoft didn’t notice, or very likely attributed others reasons for less sales.

I don’t like DRM so I don’t use streaming services like Netflix. If friends or work colleges keep talking about some show then I read Wikipedia plot section to get an idea 💀