7heo

Plus, that way, you have a trail of invites. If something goes wrong, you can prune entire branches and mitigate most abuse.

I believe you're missing the actual causality chain here.

While it is actually proven that vendors will degrade your experience artificially to "motivate" you to buy new devices, in the never ending pursuit of monetary gain, there is no such potential incentive here: you aren't paying for new drivers.

And while others suggest biases, I do believe you are witnessing an effect that is at least partially real, if not totally, but not for the reasons you believe:

Most programs that leverage GPUs end up being GPU bottlenecked. Meaning that one can almost always improve the program's performance by using a better GPU.

But then, why does a new driver not improve performance, and rather, simply "bring a degraded performance back to previous levels"?

Well, that has to do with auto-updates, and the way drivers are distributed.

While, in a world where one would have to manually update everything, a new driver would almost certainly mean better performance for a given program, most programs in our world auto-update automatically (and sometimes even, silently). And the developers are usually on top of things wrt drivers, because they follow drivers updates closely, get early versions, etc.

Meaning that when a driver is updated, your apps usually are, too. In a way that leverage the new driver for more processing, rather than faster processing. But unlike your automatically updated apps, your drivers are updated manually.

And the consequence of such updates, when you are too slow to update your drivers, is a degraded experience.

Not because anyone artificially throttled your device's performance, but because you lag too much behind expected updates.

And Docker initially used Ubuntu. They explicitly and specifically switched to Alpine in 2016 for performance, to minimise the overhead.

Note: this comment is long, because it is important and the idea that "systemd is always better, no matter the situation" is absolutely dangerous for the entire FOSS ecosystem: both diversity and rationality are essential.

Systemd can get more efficient than running hundreds of poorly integrated scripts

In theory yes. In practice, systemd is a huge monolithic single-point-of-failure system, with several bottlenecks and reinventing-the-wheel galore. And openrc is a far cry from "hundreds of poorly integrated scripts".

I think it is crucial we stop having dogmatic "arguments" with argumentum ad populum or arguments of authority, or we will end up recreating a Microsoft-like environment in free software.

Let's stop trying to shoehorn popular solutions into ill suited use cases, just because they are used elsewhere with different limitations.

Systemd might make sense for most people on desktop targets (CPUs with several cores, and several GB of RAM), because convenience and comfort (which systemd excels at, let's be honest) but as we approach "embedded" targets, simpler and smaller is always better.

And no matter how much optimisation you cram into the bigger software, it will just not perform like the simpler software, especially with limited resources.

Now, I take OpenRC as an example here, because it is AFAIR the default in devuan, but it also supports runit, sinit, s6 and shepherd.

And using s6, you just can't say "systemd is flat out better in all cases", that would be simply stupid.

Devuan + xfce.

Seeing that I'm a senior dev, take it any way you want.

How about blackholing google to limit the damage instead? And you could limit it further by not using services that you know feed data to google.

I feel cucked having google only get most of my traffic. I am an alpha male, I want them to get all of my traffic.

Thumb_nail.jpg

Oh. Yes, that makes sense. I read it too literally I suppose ("better to test" as in "better to give it a try", while "better to try it first" was meant). 🤪 thank you! 🙏

Thank you very much for this post. I'm glad someone did the effort of getting some of those and presenting them from the PoV of a first time experience. I was curious.

However, I'm not sure what you meant with:

BUT when I shared it with others, people in body reported less effectiveness due to thickness of skin and under-dermal stuff, so it's better to test it if you aren't skinny as a skeleton.

At first it sounds like you say that overweight people have trouble using them (which is logical, the device needs to touch the bones), but then you go on saying that it doesn't work for underweight people? I'm confused. Could you please elaborate a little? Thanks 🙂