ruby

as is often the case you need to follow the money, when you open up the linux foundation sponsor list and see google, microsoft, amazon, meta, and anthropic in the top tiers it gets kinda obvious why there was really no chance he’d decry the “product” from the companies paying him big bucks.

it’s really sad to me as well to see important free software projects go this route, i guess the gpl doesn’t mean much anymore since apparently it’s this widely accepted that you can introduce chatbot code with mysterious origins into your codebase now.

oudated and unmaintained software… like openrc, with a commit 3 weeks ago? or dinit with a commit 3 days ago?

installing wine with pacman doesn’t allow any special access. if you run it, then it gets access to whatever the user who ran it has access to. whether you installed it with pacman or a gui wrapper doesn’t matter.

seems like i took the bait, nice one. but considering that i’ve met people who argued that “a linux computer can’t be secure without flatpak” i’d put nothing past flatpak fans at this point.

…did that ever happen to you with healthy maintained software? i’d be quite curious to know, because it did not happen to me.

on the other hand, my image viewer doesn’t need a 300 megabyte runtime and i can launch it by its name and not by “flatpak run org.whatever.softwarename”. and as a bonus it’s dynamically linked too.

makes using it much more convenient