No it doesn’t, because it’s generally monitor manufacturers that add display port, and people who want to run on large tvs are SoL
Advocate for user privacy and anonymity
No it doesn’t, because it’s generally monitor manufacturers that add display port, and people who want to run on large tvs are SoL
Probably the same reason you’d recommend c++ instead of Python to a new developer.
Yes, they’ll learn Python faster, but with c++ they’ll learn programming faster simply due to how much Python does on the programmers behalf.
There are valid arguments for both sides
garuda is one I’ve been playing with recently, and have been very pleased with
It’s built on arch, so not the most beginner friendly base, but they add all my favorite tweaks into the base install. Including fish as the default shell which is more beginner friendly imo
And it’s built and optimized for gaming and comes with all the needed software and drivers pre installed, so even less tinkering required to get it working.
Doesn’t Microsoft own blizzard now?
Approximately how often are we going to get Linux breakages like this, do you think, given the clear conflict of interest and Microsoft’s storied history of fucking over FOSS in pursuit of profit?
That’s the problem: it is incredibly difficult to verify.
Which is exactly why people are upset.
They’re not accusing the maintainer of doing anything malicious, they’re saying the choice that was made makes it impossible for them to verify if anything malicious was done, or will be done in the entire future of the project.
The reasons given are easily addressed by some of the commenters suggestions, those suggestions have been ignored.
So now a core rust library has a big shiny hackers target on it, because if someone manages to hack or trick the builder into uploading a malicious binary, no one (maintainers included) would be any the wiser.
This is enough to get the crate blocked on a corporate level for security reasons.
Edit: that’s not to mention the extreme end of the problem, which looks more like suits showing on his door saying “here is our secret court order that says you can’t tell anyone about this. Now change the build to use this binary we provide you because we said so”
No regular open source maintainer has the ability to protect themselves or others against a state sponsored attack of that level, and it would likely look just like this if it happened.
One of the main reasons would be to try and hide what’s in it
If, for example, you wanted to add tracking code into the generated code, and knew people would stop using your product if they found out
A choice they are making in favor of a tech cartel instead of what is best for their customers, which is the problem we want addressed