Everyone*
All***

*On some versions of Android**
*Mostly Indian apps
**Workarounds exist***
***Workaround only works for checking a hardcoded list of apps, and can’t check all your apps

Informative article, but damn the clickbait

Yeah self-hosting is not hard if you are technical, but the average person won’t even entertain the idea.

I haven’t tried Immich, I’m currently happy with Ente, and I’m planning to move to Immich (and see how it compares) once it’s declared stable by the developers.

I suggest Ente Photos instead of Immich, if self-hosting is not something for you. It’s also more feature complete, as Immich is still actively being built and bugs are expected.

Nothing about the app is secret, Google openly advertises it

It’s for E2E encryption in chat apps.

His Elon Musk videos, and debunking other tech bro bullshit, absolutely, but I stopped watching him as the channel became too clickbaity/sensational for me to take seriously. I still agree with many of the opinions, but the format is not for me anymore.

Absolutely you can use it with a PC, what I’m saying is that most people don’t, and also because of that companies release Quest exclusive games that are bad. Just recently Civilisation VII was announced for VR. What an amazing game it could be, but just look yourself: https://www.meta.com/en-gb/experiences/sid-meiers-civilization-vii-vr/5781689118524197/ Even in the official store images, it looks atrocious and nowhere near what the flat version looks like (and how it could look on PC). And then people will see that and think this is what VR has to offer.

I got an Index in 2019 and I’m using it to this day, definitely got my money’s worth of gaming in that time.

There are great VR games on PC. Problem is Meta flooded the market with their standalone headsets that can only play very simple small games, and shifted the perception that that’s what VR is.

Yeah, after years of updates Cyberpunk is now an amazing game. But it’s not at all the game that was hyped up and promised. People don’t get it, everyone says it’s good now, yeah it’s great, that’s not the problem. The problem is that it’s not what it was supposed to be.

2018 was when he called the diver a pedo? That was the moment for me. I thought he was an awkward nerd trying to make electric cars a thing against all odds, an underdog. That was the moment I looked more into him and saw how wrong I was.

If it provided a feature to automatically block incoming dick pics, which Google claims it’s for, was fully local, and only scanned incoming messages, not my own gallery, which is what Google claims, I would likely find it useful. There is nothing wrong with the idea in general.

At the very least it wastes your battery

Again, if it’s an optional feature that you can choose to turn on or off, there is nothing wrong with that.

They removed don’t be evil long time ago

See, this is why I like proof. If you go to Google’s Code of Conduct today, or any other archived version, you can see yourself that it was never removed. Yet everyone believed the clickbait articles claiming so. What happened is they moved it from the header to the footer, clickbait media reported that as “removed” and everyone ran with it, even though anyone can easily see it’s not true, and it takes 30 seconds to verify, not even 5 hours.

Years later you are still repeating something that was made up just because you heard it a lot.

Of course Google is absolutely evil and the phrase was always meaningless whether it’s there or not, but we can’t just make up facts just because it fits our world view. And we have to be aware of confirmation bias. Yeah Google removing “don’t be evil” sounds about right for them, right? It makes perfect sense. But it just plain didn’t happen.

Do we have any proof of it doing anything bad?

Taking Google’s description of what it is it seems like a good thing. Of course we should absolutely assume Google is lying and it actually does something nefarious, but we should get some proof before picking up the pitchforks.

Let me try: Lmao. Uses a computer, still does stuff the slower way because learning new things is too difficult.

To be serious, I am looking for the best solutions for my use cases, not adequate ones. Yes dd works perfectly fine and as you noted doesn’t take long to use anyway. But just because it’s fine doesn’t mean other approaches aren’t better.

A GUI tool can offer or take a list of download URLs for common distros so downloading isn’t a separate step, it can check if the target device is a flash drive and not a hard drive by mistake, it can automatically choose the optimal block size for the device, it can verify the process by reading it back from the device, can show you the current filesystem, label, and usage of the target device to confirm, it can handle flashing to multiple devices at the same time with separate and total progress bars.

If I wanted to do all that on the command line it’d be quite a lot of commands or a sizeable script to write. Or I can use a simple dd command and lose out on all of the above. Either way it’s a worse option. I will only use dd when a GUI tool isn’t installed, or when I’m on a system without a DE.

It’s faster to drag and drop a downloaded ISO and choose the target from a dropdown, than do it on a command line. And get a progress bar. As much as command line is usually faster, it isn’t in this case.

Yes you can also get a progress bar on the command line but it’s more typing again, and realistically you need to look the option up every time if you use dd once every 3 months.

Well nuclear is great, so even “not much better” would be great.

Oh? And you’re the authority on that?

Well yes, I am the authority on my opinions, just like anyone else is on theirs.

I do agree though that its not necessarily the same league as the others.

That’s what I mean, I don’t think it belongs next to Matrix or 12 Monkeys. It’s a run of the mill Tom Cruise action film. Very enjoyable, but it doesn’t break any new ground, in my opinion.

Oblivion? It was all right, and I recommend it, but I wouldn’t call it a mandatory watch, it didn’t have any special message

And that’s a much better answer!

“Because it would require changes” doesn’t answer OPs question. They want to know why wasn’t it done like this in the first place, and why aren’t we making the changes to make it happen now. Of course changing things would require changes.

It’s like answering a “why are stop lights red?” question with “It wouldn’t work because stop lights factories uses red bulbs and laws require them to be red”.