He’s probably overly defensive and paranoid and interprets some forms of criticism as attacks.

I think this was also a result of his “miscommunication” in the past

there might also be parties involved who are ACTUALLY interested in attacking GrapheneOS and weakening its popularity, for their own gains.

when your successful and also high-quality project is under regular attacks from various angles

Rossman’s over-dramatic nature and high reach

then communication spirals out of control into various escalations

You should actually look at any of the copious amounts of evidence that involve this conversation instead of just imagining what it might look like. There’s really not much else to talk about until you do. Daniel has given us zero evidence to support his side, while in contrast there’s a mountain of evidence against him.

I know this is a Louis Rossman thread but calling Daniel Micay “a bit socially awkward” is minimizing the issue to an extreme. Louis Rossman made his comments after he watched Techlore’s in-depth video documenting Daniel’s behavior, but keep in mind that even that hour-long video is just scratching the surface. To this day, Daniel continues to act the same way if not worse, and has a giant list of “enemies” that he says are attacking, harassing, bullying, and gangstalking the “grapheneOS project” (aka him). This might be partially caused by him bashing other open source projects and making new enemies any chance he gets. I’m not sure when the “all open source projects get together to personally target Daniel Micay” meetings occur, but maybe the only common thread is Daniel himself. There are tons and tons of receipts out there on the web if you search for “Daniel Micay list of enemies”, especially on a site that I don’t feel comfortable promoting but which does a very good job of keeping track of this stuff - especially because Daniel always deletes everything incriminating afterwards. If you’re going to catch him in the act you need to take screenshots and make archive.org snapshots.

Daniel’s behavior is a very important issue to be aware of if you’re considering using grapheneOS, and personally it crosses the line of what I feel comfortable with in regards to running his operating system on the most personal device I have. Louis Rossman was even more justified in his decision to do the same, since Daniel is (to this day) specifically targeting him.

Their prices lately have been very unimpressive.

I don’t think ‘cattle not pets’ is all that corporate, especially w/r/t death of the author. For me, it’s more about making sure that failure modes have (rehearsed) plans of action, and being cognizant of any manual/unreplicable “hand-feeding” that you’re doing. Random and unexpected hardware death should be part of your system’s lifecycle, and not something to spend time worrying about. This is also basically how ZFS was designed from a core level, with its immense distrust for hardware allowing you to connect whatever junky parts you want and letting ZFS catch drives that are lying/dying. In the original example, uptime seems to be an emphasized tenet, but I don’t think it’s the most important part.

RE replacements on scheduled time, that might be true for RAIDZ1, but IMO a big selling point of RAIDZ2 is that you’re not in a huge rush to get resilvering done. I keep a cold drive around anyway.

“Cattle not pets” in this instance means you have a specific plan for the random death of a HDD (which RAIDZ2 basically already handles), and because of that you can work your HDDs until they are completely dead. If your NAS is a “pet” then your strategy is more along the lines of taking extra-good care of your system (e.g. rotating HDDs out when you think they’re getting too old, not putting too much stress on them) and praying that nothing unexpected happens. I’d argue it’s not really “okay” to have pets just because you’re in a homelab, as you don’t really have to put too much effort into changing your setup to be more cynical instead of optimistic, and it can even save you money since you don’t need to worry about keeping things fresh and new.

“In the old way of doing things, we treat our servers like pets, for example Bob the mail server. If Bob goes down, it’s all hands on deck. The CEO can’t get his email and it’s the end of the world. In the new way, servers are numbered, like cattle in a herd. For example, www001 to www100. When one server goes down, it’s taken out back, shot, and replaced on the line.”

~from https://cloudscaling.com/blog/cloud-computing/the-history-of-pets-vs-cattle/

As I understand it, the assertion is that the 1080p FPS is the same as 2k/4k FPS, assuming that you have an infinitely powerful GPU. So the 1080p FPS is your max potential FPS at any resolution with the CPU, and then you need to look at a GPU 2k/4k chart to see how much FPS it can achieve from that target. HWUnboxed also reasons that gamers are not blindly using ultra settings, so in real scenarios people are going to be lowering their settings to try to achieve a specific FPS target anyway. They also mention that lowering ingame settings doesn’t usually affect the CPU FPS benchmark.

So in summary, the 1080p CPU benchmark is the ~highest possible target you can achieve, and then it’s up to your GPU and ingame settings to decide how much of that target you can reach. It’s a little more difficult to grasp and calculate mentally, but it prevents the 2k/4k benchmark data from showing what is effectively misleading “point in time” data that will not be useful if you have a different GPU or ingame settings. This is most clearly demonstrated by re-reviewing older CPUs in the future-proof section and showing that putting massive GPUs on old CPUs puts the FPS benchmarks of all resolutions to roughly the same value - i.e. the CPU doesn’t truly have an effect w/r/t resolution, it’s mainly just the GPU.

One of the main points of this video is that 1080p testing is the only thing you should be looking at for CPU benchmarks (to the point that HWUnboxed is no longer doing 2k/4k testing in the future I think?), and although I was skeptical at first, the future-proof section did finally convince me. The new problem with this line of thinking is that you really need to be cross-referencing a GPU benchmark to figure out what a real world 2k/4k scenario will look like for the CPU you’re interested in.

I think ProStreet is very underrated, and I’d say that’s my favorite. The car handling is a nice balance between realistic and arcadey, and the game is just a really entertaining take on track racing. Most of the game feels tight with its controls and challenges, and there are clear ways to express skill and achieve goals. My biggest problem with it is that dominating events (setting track records) is a little too easy, which probably works well for kids, but as someone who knows how to play racing games it’s often a matter of not crashing and having a reasonable car. There’s probably a mod to change that though? The soundtrack is also a bit mid compared to other NFS titles from this time but it does grow on you a bit.

Most Wanted is probably my second place, but I think it’s not untouchable. The rubberbanding almost singlehandedly kills any sort of difficulty. In MW you’re there to race neat cars and look cool doing it. There’s no real challenge, and if there is, it’s not a fair one. It could be a little less menu-driven too. Sometimes it feels very linear in how you progress through the game, just picking event after event from the menu, and even starting police chases from it.

Carbon is probably third place? It’s more interesting than MW in a lot of ways but it’s also just more mediocre in most respects. I consider MW and Carbon to be two sides of the same coin, but if it comes down to it I think you can easily put Carbon below MW. I think most people consider Carbon to be complete trash, but I don’t think it’s fair to say there’s nothing good about it.

Underground 1 just sucks, and Underground 2 doesn’t have a lot to offer in retrospect. Both Undergrounds were amazing at the time, but now that we have newer alternatives I don’t think there’s a lot of reason to return to U2, and I think U1 has aged like milk in just about every respect. I could definitely be convinced to play U2 again, but it’s not something I feel a strong pull to return to.

Other Need for Speeds have a lot of hits and a lot of misses, and it’s hard to want to put them in any sort of ranking system. They can all be fun in certain ways, but like most people I consider Black Box NFS to be the real NFS.

Moreso the supernatural stuff for me. The other stuff was dark but I wasn’t checking for Brian under my bed.

Ugh, I feel like there’s no way I could do Arches if it’s way scarier than Echo. Maybe if I only do it during the day. I’m fairly sure when I did Echo I played it into the night and regretted that. I do feel like dipping back into it all for the story though. I think I’ll try the let’s play series at some point to start with.

If you want more psychological horror emotional abuse, try Echo, which gets frequently compared to DDLC. It’s set up like a gay furry visual novel to start with, but it’s more like Night in the Woods where the paths are who you hang out with instead of who you explicitly want to “date”. As the story progresses it gets extremely dark. I could only do one of the paths before I had to look up the others because I’m too much of a chicken.

Fair warning that it’s a slow burn to get to the rough stuff, but the story is solid and it’s humorous on the way so it’s not boring.

Edit: I hadn’t played Echo in a few years so I went to the wiki to refresh myself on the story and it is a lot more tightly-written and lore-heavy than I realized. Each “path” has a different story with a subset of the lore, so you need to play all of them to begin to understand the full picture. There’s also a sequel, a prequel, and a prequel-prequel(?), which all presumably contribute to the lore. I see there’s a giant Let’s Play of most of it, which I think I now feel compelled to watch at some point. It would probably be less spooky to experience it with other people in control.

Edit 2: I strongly recommend you don’t play Carl’s first, solely on the basis of it not being a strong introduction to the game. Carl’s route takes a long time to get into the swing of things, and the story payoff doesn’t entirely make up for it (though I still really loved this path by the end). This was apparently the first path they wrote, and cynically I think that shows a bit. Leo’s path was much more of a page-turner for me throughout and I think it gives a much stronger sample of the unique Echo flavor. Leo’s is the one I played years ago and there’s maybe a dozen moments from this path which will never leave my brain.

I’ve seen people online say to do Carl->Leo->TJ->Jenna->Flynn, and with regards to Carl and Leo I’d say objectively that’s probably the correct order in terms of lore unfolding, but there’s only a couple of small references from Carl’s route that you can notice in Leo’s route, so if you’re on the fence about whether you’re even interested in the game at all I’d do Leo’s first so you can get a proper introduction to the game’s themes.

The previous person was worried that Valve wouldn’t be able to convince “a sizable chunk of users” to move to Linux because all of the software they sell is written for Windows. If we apply a little bit of critical thinking, we realize that Valve has actually already thought of this(!) and applied a different(!) solution that solves the same problem(!) without requiring “everyone to write software for something that’s not the platform nearly all users are running”. If you want to see Valve’s attempt at getting everyone to switch to Linux without using compatibility tools you should look into how successful their Steam Machine campaign was.

They’ve more or less already done that with Proton and DXVK. Nearly all Windows games “just work” on Linux without developers needing to change anything. TBH whenever big studios develop Linux versions of games they’re usually not well-done anyway; for now it’s better if people develop with their comfy Windows tools and let compatibility tools take care of the translation. When the balance shifts to Linux dominance we can start pressing on them to learn how to use Linux SDKs.

Yes, almost certainly.

I really wish GOG was a stronger supporter of Linux. I would move my business over to GOG where possible if so. Right now I heavily value the work that Valve has put into not only making Linux gaming a reality, but the Linux desktop in general as a side-effect.

You keep using the word “animal”, but anthropomorphic cartoons are not real animals. Attraction to real animals is not what being a furry is. (You already know this, you are using the term in a loaded way in order to say one thing but mean another) (this unfortunately does not convince anyone).

There’s nothing inherent to being a furry that demands a “delusional fantasy” (you would know this if you knew what furries are). You call yourself Deceptichum and have a transformers avatar - you may be at risk of being in a “delusional fantasy” if that’s how you want to classify the people with anonymous names and furry avatars!

So where is the part where the “world is a worse place” because of furries?

It is repeatedly hilarious that you pretend that these arguments are any different than the ones homophobes are using. What is the harm, exactly?

Giving up when facing any opposition seems like you never really intended on improving your worldview. You just want to be hateful of things that you don’t understand. The irony of you thinking that those who oppose the LGBT are any different is not lost on me. It’s easy to punch down on things that you don’t personally like, but those are real people that you’re targeting with your malice. I’m not a furry, but I am gay, and as an LGBT member yourself you should understand the power of being an ally to a minority that often gets painted in a bad light. Doubly so when ~80% of furries are LGBTQIA+ in the first place; it’s an LGBT subculture.

That is again not even close to a correct definition, and it is interesting that you think yourself the best person to judge something that you don’t know the first thing about.

Unhealthy designated by you, the puritan police? Do you know that the anti-LGBT people also consider being gay unhealthy? They’re drawing the line in a different place, but still playing the same role you are. Would you recommend shock therapy for furries, or is that just a cure for being gay? If you’re so concerned with how the furry fandom works you should maybe actually research your bigotry and learn that it’s massive, and no two furries express themselves in the same way. Many do not have overlapping interests at all. You are on the fediverse, so I’d suggest you get comfortable with the idea that people are allowed to exist without your permission.