CoyoteFacts

It's worth mentioning that this sort of thinking gets really close to "there are good ones and bad ones" in some people's minds. IMO there's a lot of representation for the "non-normal" queers because they are the most vulnerable and because it needs to be clear that it's a package deal. People don't get to draw the line in places like "gays are okay but trans people are icky", and unofficially supporting mindsets like that would legitimize disgust-based morality.

People need to learn the lesson that others inherently deserve rights and respect regardless of their own personal feelings, otherwise we're just going to be fighting this battle over and over again for each minority group.

I also don’t want to have a dozen different crappy launchers from different companies to deal with. There are a lot of benefits to the user to having everything centralized in one place.

I wonder if there's a future where every game marketplace uses open standards/APIs that 3rd-party launchers (like Heroic) can consume for downloading games, checking DRM status, tracking achievements, friends, and so on. DRM is probably the hardest part of that, though maybe there could be closed-source blobs downloadable to enable a store's DRM. It's obviously not in the interest of companies solely focused on profit and dark patterns, but I wonder if Steam would ever consider using its weight to do it anyway.

While I don't think hypervisors are all that interesting to most people due to their brittle nature and real security risks, I still think there's a definite blow being dealt to Denuvo even if not a single person actually uses them. The publishers making the decision to pay for Denuvo are still going to see their games being cracked same-day, hypervisor or not, and that probably puts a lot of pressure on their decision to continue paying Denuvo.

I already read a lot of the lutris devs' honest feelings about AI and their willingness to obfuscate what they're doing with it in the initial issues/discussions. No offense, but I'm not all that interested in watching them attempt to whitewash and downplay what happened after they've had time to figure out how to spin it.

I just did it manually, pointing faugus at the old prefixes and setting the launch options the same

I guess I've just been behind the times, but I've never had an incentive to switch. I just installed faugus and transferred everything over and it seems very slick. It seems to be missing 1 or 2 things, like environment variables per-game, but all the other important stuff seems to be here. I know what I'm doing with prefixes so having all the knobs to turn is great, but honestly linux gaming does not need most of those knobs nowadays.

Whether or not I use Claude is not going to change society

This gives me shopping cart theory vibes. I don't usually base my moral compass based on whether my action will have some kind of measurable impact, but whether I believe it's the right thing to do. After the intense doubling down in that discussion thread I'm definitely steering clear of lutris. It costs me very little effort to avoid projects that do icky things I don't want to encourage (even though it may not have a measurable impact~)

Oh my god my biggest pet peeve is every single new project awarding itself "modern, lightweight, blazing fast". Seeing these words actually negatively affects my perception of your new super cool project. Along with the fucking emojis.

aka:

Modern: "I couldn't understand the codebase of the previous solution, so I rewrote it using stuff I'm familiar with"

Lightweight: "Featureless/no features that I don't use"

Blazing fast: "Doesn't have any edge cases handled yet"

It makes sense to want to use Delta Chat because of the UX right now, but I'm just assuming the UX on all of these projects is bad in some way, and I'm assuming there are improvements to be made in other regards as well (Delta Chat is only recently trying to land Perfect Forward Secrecy, for example). I'm more concerned with looking at the future trajectories of these projects, as someone who has had to convert their friend group between solutions multiple times and is sick of projects that don't go anywhere or will get superseded by projects with better designs.

With that in mind, I'm mainly looking at the fundamentals of the implementation and if, given enough community support/money, all the UX issues could be solved eventually. Even projects like Matrix, which sucks for a few big reasons right now, could still be mostly fixed up with enough effort. My suspicion is that "fixing up" Delta Chat would realistically mean that they should move away from emails as part of their stack, unless there is some actual value-add from keeping it.

(For the record my friends and I are using Signal currently. I played around with SimpleX a long time ago but found the UX lacking for normies.)

Yeah I did, I watched the talk and read the article before I posted. I understand that the article calls out several times "email is fine actually", but I'm not under any delusions that Delta Chat is using "traditional email", which is what the article spends the most time debunking. The article's points on stubbornly using email technology were "countries have a harder time blocking it" (which I mainly focused on) and "email servers are battle-tested". I'm not counting the second point as worth talking about since it's kind of dumb to imply that there's no possible way to have more efficient communication relays than pre-existing email servers, and they're already modifying those email servers to fit their own purposes anyway so that removes the "battle-tested" perk.

(Not a crypto expert, not familiar with Delta Chat at all, vaguely familiar with SimpleX)

I kind of don't understand why this is being built on top of email at all. They say it's harder to block by nation-level actors, but how is something like SimpleX easier to block? They also needed to staple Iroh and its encryption implementation on as additional surface area in order to get regular chat capabilities because email transport doesn't support things like larger data or real-time communication (voice/video). I see a lot of ways that they have retrofitted email technology to fit parts of the task, but not really a compelling reason why we needed to use email technology as part of the solution? Is it really just the nation-level thing, and is that really only possible through using email?

Assuming SimpleX is resistant to government censorship in the same way that Delta Chat is (multiple dumb relays, no central identities, etc), what transport/encryption problems are being solved that something more purpose-built couldn't handle? Is Delta Chat more of a proof-of-concept that it's possible to get this far when starting with email (which, yes, congrats, it is impressive), or is it meant to be the last word in instant messaging? Given that it's not popular right now, I'm not sure if I'm compelled to switch to or support it over some other new bespoke technology that isn't starting with its hands tied behind its back?

Arches isn't pornographic, but it can still hurt you in other ways.