They're also effectively creating a market for linux gaming, which will encourage developers to actually officially support linux.
Note that I use "will" instead of "might" based on personal anecdotal evidence of seeing more and more games support linux natively (not on Proton) since the steamdeck launched. Granted, it's more indie games than AAA, but the latter will never care until the market becomes actually sizable.
Linux has already had decades of long-term "strategy" that did not in any way shape or form bring gaming to linux... except of course for the tireless effort of wine, which is the basis for proton. In other words, even if you're right, and you well might be, I feel that the point is moot since there's no linux gaming market otherwise, and valve can't kill what's already dead.
Unless you have alternative strategies in mind that have not been tried and failed already
An involved alternative is to access whatsapp through a matrix bridge. It requires either paying for hosting or figuring out how to host a matrix server and the whatsapp bridge [1]; I do the latter and can attest it's not very hard if you have a technical background (and you're on hn, so you probably do), but YMMV. There's a lot of matrix clients, all of which open source; and the whatsapp bridge works really well nowadays, enough that I've been using it almost exclusively for my texting (no whatsapp calls tho).
In fact, I recently bought a non-smartphone running KaiOS, and use whatsapp through a matrix client, chooj - which, although in early alpha, works well for my use case of accessing whatsapp while outside the home without having to carry an addictive smartphone with me. KaiOS does have a native whatsapp app, but it does not support whatsapp web at all, and that is an absolute necessity for me, especially when typing requires (bad) T9.
My point is, matrix bridges afford A LOT of freedom with how to access whatsapp (and other closed-source communication apps), if you're willing to deal with some friction. And now they're stable and mature enough that they work pretty darn well - no doubt thanks in part to support from beeper [2], which funds development for several major bridges. Within the android ecosystem, beeper is probably the easiest way to gateway all your communications through matrix, though I have no experience with it. Sounds like paid matrix+bridge hosting, plus a generally much nicer and frictionless experience.
Does it support increasing playback speed without affecting pitch? I'd like to get a capable mp3 player that I can use for podcasts, but I need to lidten tkm some of them at 1.5x/2x.
I tried an old samsung mp3 player I had lying around, but for some reason they thought implementing playback speed without adjusting the pitch was fine, so my podcasts sound like chipmunks. Needless to say, I abandoned the idea of using it.
I believe you're being downvoted because you missed the point of the comment you're replying to, which is not (necessarily) trying to imply the convention is that X+ means exactly "more than X" (i.e. >X). You're right that "X or more" (>= X) is an acceptable interpretation. This is not what the comment is nitpicking.
The page we're discussing lists PyCon talks next to the number of viewers. It writes "X or more viewers" as +X; this does not follow any variant of this "convention". It's as if you wrote that you are +30 years old, instead of 30+. The problem is the placement of the +. That's just weird/incorrect.
A "link to higher chance of depression" does not mean that 100% of the people with 1 hour commute develop depression. Even if it meant that 99% do, your belonging to the remaining 1% does not invalidate the study. Personal experience is anedoctal evidence, i.e. not science, not _true_ in the sense that it generalizes beyond yourself. People are different from one another, and what might be neutral or enjoyable for you might be depressing for other people. All this study is saying is that on average, a long commute is more likely to be depressing.
Also, there is some arrogance in assuming that all those depressed people just _haven't thought about_ cycling to work, or listening to a podcast, and should just pull themselves up by their bootstraps to start feeling better.
Not everyone gets to make lemonade out of lemons. For one thing, you need to be able to afford sugar (_but it's cheap to me!_). For another, you need to like lemonade in the first place.
Besides... Correlation is not causation, and the depression might not be a direct consequence of being bored on transport. Perhaps it's because they get to spend 30 fewer minutes with their family, pets, or hobbies. Perhaps it turns out people with longer commutes tend to have worse paying jobs, or live in areas with less opportunities for recreation (even a local park counts). But I think it's at least plausible that lengthening your already-too-long workday by an hour can't possibly make your life happier.
Could you point me to any sources that discuss how the program "has no basis in science"? They have a section on effectiveness citing a few studies and the Cochrane review. I'm not well-equipped to determine if that's conclusive, of course. Is there overwhelming evidence to the contrary?
As someone else pointed out, there is a section on thirteenth stepping. Do you find it insufficient, or is it a recent addition..?
I am not invested either way, I am just curious. If what you're saying is accurate, it's a stark reminder that Wikipedia articles may _look_ well-researched and still ignore or hide enough evidence to fundamentally change the story.
This is something I have a hard time coping with: that no matter how many sources are cited, there is no way of knowing how many are missing... in some cases a few minutes of research can uncover obvious lies (and it's already a titanic effort to cursorily check most of your beliefs), but in others it takes actual expertise in the topic to know.
Edit: After a better look at the Criticism section, the article seems less-than-neutral in listing critical sources. "In the past, some critics have criticized 12-step programs as pseudoscientific". I would object to the use of "In the past" here: the sources cited are from 2015 and 2010 (although both of them are prior to the 2020 Cochrane review, which the Wikipedia page seems to consider conclusive. Still, unclear wording which spins the opinions as outdated). Similarly, two sources of criticism are listed under the "Popular press" section. Perhaps a better wording would be "Non peer-reviewed".
If you believe that AA _is_ ineffective, then this wording is certainly a misdirection. If you believe that the sources in its favor are conclusive, then it's adequate. Neutrality is tricky, and while it's extremely important in some topics, it should not be entertained in others (should the article on Earth be "neutral" and faithfully cite flat-earthers as a reasonable side?) Again, I don't know which way this should go, as I don't have any degree of certainty either way, because I know absolutely nothing about the subject.
> Could you point me to any sources that discuss how the program "has no basis in science"?
Do you know anything about it? The primary source I'd cite would be their own literature. It doesn't claim to be based in science. Sobriety is only possible by giving up your ego and embracing a higher power.
That's fair to point out. However, I don't think it detracts from the point: the definition is in some sense a detail, because there is a connection between "bubbles forming" and "the temperature water will not rise beyond", but it's subtle and assuming that one equals the other leads to error. The very reason we have that definition is that it's more precise, because in the real world there's details that escape narrow definitions as seen in school or in the kitchen.
As an aside: I love the bubbling patterns of water as it heats, and it's actually a useful skill in the world of tea-making (especially in the gongfu tradition) to estimate the temperature of water based on the amount and size of bubbles. Nowadays I use a temperature-controlled kettle, but in the past I would get by with a clear borosilicate glass kettle and paying attention to the details, which is fun and rewarding in itself—if far less precise.
Precisely. If your job is a legislator, competence (or ability to delegate it) is part of the job description and, if you believe in democracy, a moral imperative. Thus, incompetence IS malice in such cases.
There is such thing as wilful ignorance, as Aristotle condemned it millennia ago, and it is morally reprehensible.
Do you have recommendations for modern "factorio meets Minecraft" modpacks? The more hardcore and complex the better.
I am very out of the loop with Minecraft, not having played in quite a few years. Meanwhile, I have been getting into factorio... but the thought of going back to my Minecraft roots is appealing
Pretty sure between the very active developer community they've built up and the incredibly deep and broad tech progression, new end-game content is being added faster than players could possibly reach it. Got pretty in-depth quest tree to keep pointed in the right direction.
Note that I use "will" instead of "might" based on personal anecdotal evidence of seeing more and more games support linux natively (not on Proton) since the steamdeck launched. Granted, it's more indie games than AAA, but the latter will never care until the market becomes actually sizable.
Linux has already had decades of long-term "strategy" that did not in any way shape or form bring gaming to linux... except of course for the tireless effort of wine, which is the basis for proton. In other words, even if you're right, and you well might be, I feel that the point is moot since there's no linux gaming market otherwise, and valve can't kill what's already dead.
Unless you have alternative strategies in mind that have not been tried and failed already