• 4 Posts
  • 1.22K Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 15th, 2023

help-circle
  • I guess I’ll look into XFS and see if it’s suitable for my use cases (I know almost nothing about it), but this supports my opinion that BTRFS is an easy choice over EXT4 at least.

    Edit: No snapshot support in XFS, so I’ll stick with BTRFS. My performance requirements are not that high on desktop. If I set up a high-performance server that would be another matter.

    I was surprised to learn that F2FS has rather small maximum volume sizes. 16TB with 4K block sizes, 64TB with 16K block sizes. But your whole kernel needs to use 16K pages to use 16K F2FS blocks, which seems like more trouble than it’s worth. Either way, it’s so non-future-proof I’m not even going to think about it.







  • It ranges from “automatic” to “infuriating”.

    If you have Secure Boot enabled, there are some hoops to jump through. Read the docs and follow the steps for DKMS.

    Depending on your distro and your requirements, you might want to install the drivers manually from Nvidia rather than using older drivers from your distro.

    If you need CUDA, god help you. Choose a distro that makes this easy and use containers to avoid dependency hell. Note that this is not any easier on Windows (at least not last I checked, which was a few years ago).




  • GenderNeutralBro@lemmy.sdf.orgtoFirefox@lemmy.ml*Permanently Deleted*
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    21 days ago

    Arc has a similar feature, but last I checked it used ChatGPT. Firefox runs a local model, so it avoids the privacy issue.

    I have no problem with this in principle. The question is, does it suck? Document summary is a use case LLMs are well suited for, but it’s still highly application-specific. I’ve seen great summarizers and I’ve seen garbage summarizers. Hopefully Mozilla’s implementation is not as lazy as most others.


  • I’m actually using an atomic distro now (Bazzite). But that’s not why I chose it, and honestly I don’t think the advantages are significant.

    There are some downsides that affect me on a regular basis, though.

    I need to reboot more since every update requires it. That feels like going back in time 25 years.

    I need to deal with the complexity of multiple distros with DistroBox to get the functionality I am accustomed to. I think that alone is proof that atomic distros are not quite ready for prime time.

    The advantages elude me. Snapper or timeshift handle rollbacks just fine, as long as you use a modern filesystem like btrfs. So I haven’t worried about busted updates in years.

    I’m quite happy with Bazzite, but I can’t point to anything good about it that is specific to immutable distros. I just don’t get it, really. I guess the advantages are more for the developers and maintainers than for end users.







  • just let me play the old version of the game on the new console.

    I don’t think you need to buy any upgrades to play the original Switch versions on Switch 2. It’s supposed to be almost 100% backwards-compatible with Switch games, with a few exceptions for games that rely on specific hardware features (like IR).

    Correct me if I’m wrong, but I think the original BotW and TotK will play just fine on Switch 2 without upgrading.

    Considering how poor the performance was in TotK, I really think Nintendo should have made it a free update. That’s fairly common on the PlayStation side. Lots of PS4 games got free updates with PS5 optimizations, for example (and even more free updates for PS5 Pro).

    I dropped TotK due partly to the performance issues. At this point I might rather play it on an emulator than buy it again for Switch 2.