however, they make quite a bit of profit

Pretty sure they didn’t for a while. It’s the same approach as always. Operate at a loss, gain (nonpaying) users, maybe sell or use their data and slowly turn up whatever you are doing to make money (ads, fee).

No, they are not ideologically communist. A ruling party is by definition not communist. They are diometrically opposed.

Being ideologically communist simply means that you believe the ideal society is a communist society. Theoretically, you could be the king of britain and still be a communist.

I’m sure there are many people who are members of communist parties who are not actual communists, but there are some true believers who think they are working towards a communist society in the far future by building up state power in order to “compete” with capitalist/imperialist forces.

Again, I doubt their methods will work. I don’t think you can work towards a stateless society by strenghtening the state. But I’m not gonna deny their ideals because I don’t like their approach.

There are virtually zero actually communist countries in the world. That is factually true.

I’m not a marxist, but this point doesn’t make sense to me. “Communist countries” aren’t called that because they have somehow managed to achieve a communist society (which would be impossible to exist in a capitalist world), but because they are ruled by a governent that is ruled by a group/party which is (or at the very least claims to be) ideologically communist…

Sure, but the scene is the first scene of the movie. There is nothing you can miss.

Except of course if you know anything about the movie or what it is about, but then it should be kinda obvious why they are shooting at the dog…

To be fair, epic is losing money trying to gain users from steam. They weren’t profitable even before they lowered their cut.

I’m pretty sure valve could go lower than 30%, but I doubt they could go as low as 12% and still remain profitable.

it’s just a PC

Yeah, that’s kinda my point.

Who cares if they aren’t gamers. Valve also sells digital creative software on Steam.

If we are talking about businesses, chances are they will simply install windows on it and use licences of applications they already own… Again, “it’s just a pc”. The vast majority of businesses don’t buy licenses on steam, so why would they change that?

Couldn’t a problem be that If they set the price too low, companies buy them in bulk and using them as cheap, performant and sexy looking pcs? Consoles are very restricted in terms of os and other software, forcing people to use them in a way that almost guarantees you earning back your loss in the long term.

Steam machines are the opposite, you can install virtually anything on it and use them for whatever.

The headset itself is running linux and it is meant to be used with the steam machine, which also runs on linux.

Just the world’s politicians have

Not sure this is true. When people have more percieved short term problems (war, job security, inflation, etc), percieved long term problems become less important, especially if the proposed solutions have a negative impact on the short term problems.

There are multiple candidates, but if elections are held in a one party state, they all belong to the same party or a party that is effectively under the dominating party’s control.

The root of the problem is the system

If you only drink sugary drinks, water doesn’t taste all that great in comparison.

The only teal obstacle is some anti cheat software, mostly kernel level anti cheat.

So if you want to play shooters like fortnite, pubg, valorant or rainbow six siege, you are out of luck.

Otherwise, you probably won’t have any issues.

I use and love debian a lot for servers because it is super stable and relatively lightweight, but I definitely would not recommend it for desktops/notebooks, especially not to people new to linux based systems.

It’s super purist about foss, which means you only get free and open source software (no steam, discord, etc) per default and it uses an older kernel (which makes it more stable, but less feature rich and less compatible with new hardware).

If you use something like fedora, linux mint (as far as I heard) or even ubuntu, your experience would probably be a lot better.

On my private PC, I’m using a GUI/Mouse anyway (browsing, gaming, etc). I have to do 2 clicks to update.

If I use terminal, I have to open terminal, then I have to either login as root or run update as sudo, which means I have to authenticate.

If I already have an open terminal, I might be faster. Otherwise, I’m about as fast as with GUI. In any way, there is no significant benefit to updating software via terminal vs GUI, especially if you are an enduser who does not have significant experience with shells…

For many tasks I agree that a shell is better and faster once you have basic knowledge for it, but it is a reality that many basic users are not used to using a shell or are even scared to use one… And at least since I’ve been use Fedora a couple of years ago, I think using a GUI for basic stuff is reasonably viable without having a significantly worse experience and not comparable with “not using all gears in a car”.

Ok so what exactly is the big advantage you get when installing updates from a terminal as opposed to installing it via GUI? If I read your analogy, one could think it is faster, but I don’t think it is.

Even if it is, for whatever reason, not part of the repository you have installed, you can still go on steam’s website and download the package from there… In other words, the worst case scenario is literally the same experience as you would have on windows…

I just wanted to install steam, but it wasn’t in the package manager list.

Maybe you used Debian, which only allows free software in their default repo? But then you won’t be able to just install it with apt either. But even if it is not in the repository, you could still go on steam website and download the package from there, so literally the same experience as on windows…

You don’t have to do seriously advanced stuff on linux to run into issues without using the terminal.

Like what?

It’s not realistic that you don’t have to use the terminal on linux if you want to do any more than web browsing and some text editing, etc.

10 years ago, or maybe even 5 years ago, I would have agreed with you. Not anymore though, not if you use a half-way beginner friendly distro…

We were talking about normal user stuff that normal users do, not “seriously advanced stuff”… And I agree that most normal users probably don’t want to use terminals because they are not familiar with them. But normal users probably don’t and shouldn’t do “seriously advanced stuff”, no?

Yes, if you are trying to do “serously advanced stuff” (whatever that means), chances are you will probably need a terminal (or a terminal will at least be easier), but you shouldn’t be doing “seriously advanced stuff” unless you know what you are doing anyway…

Unless you have a system without a GUI, you don’t need to open a terminal in order to update or install stuff. There is a GUI for that. And no, you don’t need to build stuff from GitHub for normal user stuff…