nakal

You don’t own games generally. It’s always a license for software use. You may own the game, if you buy the company and the license is fully under its control.

Software is not a product. And there is no guarantee you will be able to run it forever, even if you made a copy of your entire setup. It’s especially the case with Windows, because it’s bound to a specific hardware that will break one day. Microsoft also cares less and less about gamers (see what they do with their operating system for consumers) and they have a way out with XBox. My bet is that Windows is not making money for Microsoft anymore and it will degrade more and more. Gabe knows it and has a strategy against it. If you’re a gamer and want have games on PC, use Linux and support the good cause.

I’m a total newb when I use GUIs. I need max automation… I don’t really know how to do this. Also… I never had issues with drivers. And on Windows there is almost nothing installed. You need to install stuff by using a browser … horrible.

Every time someone cries about hardware not being supported, you find out they didn’t care to look up compatibility. You can also ask the vendor, if you’re lost.

It’s like you buy a Diesel car and complain that it it’s annyoing because it breaks when you fill in gasoline.

That’s why it’s also called Curry-Howard isomorphism.

Programs are mathematical proofs. If maths cannot be patented, software can’t be, either.

This doesn’t seem to be a problem with snap. Canonical probably tried to show vendors a way how to distribute software commercially. But vendors are on the level of cavemen and don’t know shit about Linux even after serving a solution. Or they simply don’t care about building up a market opportunity.

I don’t want to defend Ubuntu. I don’t like Ubuntu especially, but it might be a simple explanation.

Next time buy from vendors who use USB flash drive or bootable CD-ROM.

My favs:

• Bossfight - Milky Ways
• Teminite & Panda Eyes - Highscore
• Panda Eyes - Antipixel

You should notice that I use the word “trust”. I install stuff on my servers and PCs from people who I trust. Why should I trust someone who makes an anticheat engine. Why should I have a reason to do that?

You should also understand that a kernel-level piece of code that can be updated is a very good rootkit. It contains all essential tools to modify hardware, kernel, install drivers, keyloggers etc. It satisfies the definition of “rootkit” very well.

One single piece of code is enough to be a rootkit.

Also definition by antimalware vendors:
https://www.trendmicro.com/vinfo/us/security/definition/rootkit
https://www.kaspersky.com/resource-center/definitions/what-is-rootkit
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/downloads/rootkit-revealer#what-is-a-rootkit

Popular definition (e.g . Ionos):

Rootkits: The rootkit is considered to be a type of Trojan horse. Many Trojan horses exhibit the characteristics of a rootkit. The main difference is that rootkits actively conceal themselves in a system and also typically provide the hacker with administrator rights.

If you compromise your system with software that you don’t know and potentially can introduce a backdoor (even involuntary via bugs), you have a rootkit installed.

If you don’t trust it, don’t install it with admin privileges. Maybe don’t install it at all. Anticheat is a shady business. And mostly not owned by the company that produces the maybe trusted product to be protected.

Anti cheat = rootkit. You should not install it at all.

I can only use Xmonad as a window manager, so I’d like to avoid Wayland. But what Mozilla enables as default is fortunately not relevant.

Linux distributions compile stuff by themselves. No one uses vendor-provided software if there is a way to compile it.

It’s called entertainment. It makes as much sense to mix up addiction with games, as with NFL, football, TV, movies etc.

From a private end user point of view yes. But in enterprises Windows and Office is successful. Lots of money is going to Microsoft here.

Sooner or later everyone will find their way to Debian. It’s boring and it works.

(My opinion) No, you aren’t paranoid. I’m thinking a bit like you, but I also consider probabilities. You need to download the checksums from the official website and the ISO from mirrors. Two different sources would need to be hacked. This is where I say, it’s hard and secondly someone would notice that hack very quickly.

Signing the ISO or the checksums with a well-known signature is still important. I verify it, if a signature available. It’s just a couple of seconds and doesn’t cost anything.

Also to train Microsoft to be more annoying.

Usually, they can, if there are risk of violence appearing. You’re allowed to protest peacefully, but the current situation suggests the protest would be based on anger and maybe provocation.

I get confused by non-modal text editors.