Yep. When I say “I use Keepass” what I actually mean is “I use KeepassXC, Macpass, KeepassDX, etc. depending on which OS I’m on at the time” and AFAIK none of those are actually made by the original Keepass developer.

No, he shouldn’t have switched to Bitwarden. Why the fuck do people keep recommending cloud shit instead of Keepass?

I don’t know where this weird trope of thinking Keepass is somehow obsolete or inferior came from, because it isn’t.

The monster happened to be nearby and heard or felt the impact (does the monster have ears? We do not know).

Yes, plesiosaurs have inner ears similar to other aquatic reptiles.

I was thinking more in terms of replying to the comments within threads, rather than the posts themselves. But yeah, I guess you’ve got a point that the number of comments under a post might influence its position in some types of feeds.

Okay, it’s even more confusing than I realized.

I would’ve said that “O-Scale” in the US refers to both the 1:48 rolling stock and the 1.25" track used with it (but that you could also call the track “O gauge” if you want), while “O-Gauge” in the UK refers to both the 1.43.5 rolling stock and the 32 mm track used with it (which happens to be only 0.25 mm different to the US track).

Now that I’ve looked it up, though, apparently there’s a third European standard involving 1:45 stock on a 32 mm track. And of course, there’s 0-27 gauge (which is almost the same as O and mostly compatible with it but not quite), and apparently several other variants. It’s a real mess.

Happily, I think other scales like G, HO, and N don’t have nearly as much of that sort of problem.

Edit: never mind, I just read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_transport_modelling_scales#Scale_standards and it’s a clusterfuck everywhere.

I think the names for the sizes are mostly the same, but different sizes are common in different countries.

Also, IIRC there’s an “O-gauge” and an “O-scale” and they aren’t the same.

In my experience, [proprietary] projects are doing well if their Makefile isn’t so broken that they have to run it twice just to make sure everything actually compiles. And you want them to actually optimize it…?!

I just watched the LTT video about DLSS 5, and the main thought I had was “never mind making questionable changes to these already very high fidelity games; what would happen if you tried to apply it to some old game, like Morrowind or Half-Life?” (In other words, some game that both (a) actually needs graphics improvements, and (b) runs at so high a framerate that you can afford to cut it in half.)

That may be an explanation, but it isn’t an excuse.

To be clear, I’m writing from a Lemmy/Reddit/Slashdot perspective. Maybe on Mastodon/Twitter (or, dog forbid, Facebook) it’s different, but I wouldn’t know because I’ve never used that shit.

How does a project literally named “.NET” manage to fuck up so bad as to need WINE instead of just Mono?

Emojis are modern-day hieroglyphs.

The point is not to change the troll’s opinion; the point is to discredit them in front of whoever else may be reading the thread.

Also, the other action other than blocking them is reporting them and having a mod or admin remove them for everybody at once.

Both of those are better options than individually blocking.

Blocking doesn’t stop them from propagandizing others.

As expected? There’s been a few high profile RE efforts recently of games of the era without AI tooling. The Mario 64 decompile effort from a few years ago being the most notable.

Those are just as bad, if not worse. Decompiling the thing just means the generated source code is a derivative work of the proprietary original. You can’t put a Free Software license on that!

The problem is that if it’s not a clean-room/Chinese wall reimplementation, then it isn’t Free Software regardless of what license they try to slap on it. In order for a Free Software license to be valid the person choosing the license has to be the copyright holder to begin with, and if it’s a derivative work of the proprietary original – which it is, if it’s created by feeding the original into an AI – then they aren’t!

I’m pretty sure this time it’s different, in the sense that the “deal” is just a fig leaf to try to legitimize what the US has already taken by force. (Likely motivated in part by learning from the previous nationalizations you mentioned, BTW, although I do not mean to imply Trump regime deserves any credit whatsoever for the “learning” part.)

INT: knowing tomatoes are fruits
WIS: understanding that they don’t belong in a fruit salad
CHA: doing it anyway and selling it as ‘salsa’

Then transcode it to whatever other format you need yourself. Point is, the thing being sold ought to be the highest quality possible.

But then, that would likely mean an expectation of a lower price tag and they wouldn’t want that.

In other words, they want to commit fraud with impunity. Because that’s what lying about the difference between a sale and a rental is: fraud on Sony’s part.