• 5PACEBAR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    In all fairness my mental health IS better since I’ve moved to Linux.

    Turns out constant ads, AI crap I can’t disable, the feeling of being spied on and other corporate tech-bro soul-sucking shenanigans is not great for one’s mental health.

    • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      6 days ago

      I think you just described why being on social media is bad for our mental health. Or most of the internet now really. I’ve never had ads or AI shit in the tens of thousands of Windows deployments I’ve had to push out at companies. I also don’t have them on my families personal machines.

      It’s a bad move by Microsoft to include that shit… But it isn’t them that got my mental health this way. They are just falling into the well if everyone is shanking public mental health and making money off it … I guess we have to as well otherwise our shareholders quite literally will sue us for not attempting to make them more money at every stage all of the time reguardless of the harm it could cause.

      Turns out capitalism might not be good for our mental health…

    • Ilovethebomb@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      I feel you’re vastly overstating how bad Windows is, to be honest.

      Although I am still running 10.

  • Aneb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      6 days ago

      No, Richard, it’s ‘Linux’, not ‘GNU/Linux’. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation. Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ. One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS – more on this later). He named it ‘Linux’ with a little help from his friends. Why doesn’t he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff – including the software I wrote using GCC – and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don’t want to be known as a nag, do you? (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies where-ever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title ‘GNU/Linux’ (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example. Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn’t the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you’ve heard this one before. Get used to it. You’ll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it. You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never executed that bloatware, it certainly isn’t more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn’t perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument. Last, I’d like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn’t be fighting among ourselves over naming other people’s software. But what the heck, I’m in a bad mood now. I think I’m feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn’t you and everyone refer to GCC as ‘the Linux compiler’? Or at least, ‘Linux GCC’? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD? If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this: Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux’ huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don’t be a nag.

  • nope@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    7 days ago

    That way, instead of taking care of yourself, you can the care of your machine !

  • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    7 days ago

    I see a lot of the “even once you pick a Linux distro you get yelled at for using the wrong one” and like I just haven’t seen that here?

    Lemmy is by far the chilliest place of Linux users I’ve ever fucking seen. Even when I posted an issue on the Linux mint forum I got fucking told “well you used XFCE, there’s your issue” despite it being the better choice for that system

    We absolutely will pressure people to try it, because we’re a cult. Meetings on Thursdays at 9PM for my local chapter

  • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    It’s useful if your mental health issues are caused by Microsoft. For example, if I ever have to go through another license audit, I may have a psychotic break.

    • ConsistentAlgae@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      7 days ago

      You put it out in the universe. You’re doomed to go through another one!

      (I’ve been in IT for 10 years, I don’t wish this on my worst enemy, sorry for your luck.)

      • 👍Maximum Derek👍@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        7 days ago

        My company did (via dell) for employee workstations. Microsoft puts you though a site audit if you have anything they ever made. And if you have some products you also end up paying prices for things they didn’t make. “You have network connect phones on the same vlan as a windows server? Here’s a license for each phone, that’ll be $8000 please. Now lets talk about all your printers…”

  • nickwitha_k (he/him)@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    If based on reality, I’m sorry to hear it and how it gets better soon. As a Linux user for over a decade, this is extremely funny.

    Now, have you heard of Plan9 from Bell Labs?.. /s