If they are competent with computers, they can probably figure out Ubuntu and maintain it theirself.
I left Ubuntu for systems I manage because I’m not smart enough or willing to invest time learning snaps, and snaps kept breaking Firefox updates and generally made Firefox unusable. Since I’ve been around a while, I found it was just easier to migrate my fleet to Debian and set it to look like Ubuntu with the dock on the left. This has been fine since 2022.
If it’s something you would be partially managing, and they didn’t like Mint, have them try Pop!_OS.
If it’s a super simple, low maintenance desktop, just go Fedora Silverblue and it will stay solid and up to date until the hardware dies.
Bitcoin is stupid, but the point of Unicode is that we have a symbol for everything that has a commonly recognized symbol or representative value, or even uncommonly recognized.
If ⅌ gets a character, or all the symbols of the Byzantine musical notation system, I’m not sure why a typically recognized symbol for a cryptocurrency shouldn’t.
The weird bit is that they put together a petition. All you really need to do is submit a proposal and show that it’s a notable symbol and not owned by anyone in particular or a brand icon.
There really isn’t a difference between a character and an emoji beyond an emoji being a stylized rendering of a character, or a character whose use is intended as a pictograph.
They’re all just Unicode code points, although I suppose there’s some distinction between the characters with more context specific meaning or the ones that are more apt to modification a la 🧑⚕️👩🏿⚕️. But you’ve also got 💲 and $, where “bold dollar sign” is often represented as green, but “dollar sign” tends to be represented in contextual style. Is ☣ a character or an emoji? What about the thousands of “other symbols” as defined by the Unicode spec which may or may not have special character renderings depending on your platform and font?
And yeah, I didn’t know that character existed, so now it’s doubly confusing why anyone is asking for anything. The symbol has meaning, and it’s in the big book of meaningful symbols. Not sure what more they want.
There’s no ambiguity. Emoji are characters in the emoticons code block (U+1F600…U+1F64F). Emoji are indeed a subset of characters, but anything outside that block is not an emoji.
Edit: jumped the gun on that definition, just took the code block from Wikipedia. But there is no ambiguity on which character is an emoji and which is not. The Unicode Consortium publishes lists of emoji and guidelines on how they should be rendered.
Gotcha, so ⌚(U+231A, miscellaneous technical block) isn’t an emoji, despite it clearly being a pictograph, and there are only 80 emoji?
I feel like this definition isn’t in line with either the lay definition of emoji, nor the technical definition
Emoji are pictographs (pictorial symbols) that are typically presented in a colorful cartoon form and used inline in text. They represent things such as faces, weather, vehicles and buildings, food and drink, animals and plants, or icons that represent emotions, feelings, or activities.
People often ask how many emoji are in the Unicode Standard. This question does not have a simple answer, because there is no clear line separating which pictographic characters should be displayed with a typical emoji style.
Emoji are seriously just Unicode characters that sometimes get rendered as a fancy image. That’s it. There’s an entire bit about how different characters have different conventional presentations and a codified system of “default” for image or “text”.
The presentation of a given emoji character depends on the environment, whether or not there is an emoji or text presentation selector, and the default presentation style (emoji versus text). In informal environments like texting and chats, it is more appropriate for most emoji characters to appear with a colorful emoji presentation, and only get a text presentation with a text presentation selector. Conversely, in formal environments such as word processing, it is generally better for emoji characters to appear with a text presentation, and only get the colorful emoji presentation with the emoji presentation selector.
That’s why there’s things like ☣️ and ☣. Same codepoint, but different presentation hints. (I’m assuming that our various systems will do the right thing and capture the presentation hints, otherwise I’m going to look very odd putting the same symbol over and over :-) )
I rushed to just grab that codeblock from Wikipedia. But the selection of which characters are considered emoji is not arbitrary. The Unicode Consortium (their Unicode Emoji Standard and Research Working Group to be exact) publishes those list and guidelines on how they should be rendered. I believe the most recent version of the standard is Emoji 15.1.
Edit: I realized I’m going off track here by just reacting to comments and forgetting my initial point. The difference I was initially alluding to is in selection criteria. The emoji. for assigning a character a Unicode codepoint is very different from the criteria for creating a new emoji. Bitcoin has a unique symbol and there is a real need to use that symbol in written material. Having a unicode character for it solves that problem, and indeed one was added. The Emoji working group has other selection criteria (which is why you have emoji for eggplant and flying money, and other things that are not otherwise characters. So the fact that a certain character exists, despite its very limited use, has no bearing on whether something else should have an emoji to represent it.
I am aware of the lists and guidelines, I’ve been linking and quoting them to you. :)
It’s their report on the standards that highlights that they don’t think there’s a clear distinction between “emoji” and “character”, and that it’s mostly a matter of user expectation.
Hence some pictograph characters having a default “text” presentation, and some having a default “emoji” presentation. They also clarify that some things with a default “emoji” presentation aren’t in the set of characters people would associate with emoji and shouldn’t be counted if you’re trying.
I understand what you’re saying, which is that the selection criteria is different for a “language symbol” as opposed to a “pictographic symbol”, so they’re different things.
I disagree and think that “default presentation” might be a better metric, but that ultimately it’s about user and platform expectations. The same character can be presented “emoji” style or “text” style depending on context.
In any case, I’d also agree that there’s no viability to the notion that people use the Bitcoin symbol in a way that’s independent of the one meaning that it has, so a colorful cartoony rendition becoming an option doesn’t really fit. “His Christmas gift was $$$” is a sentiment people might express. “The hotel is ₿₿₿” just … Isn’t.
Ubuntu is a great distro. It’s performant, ,its stable, its well configured it looks nice out of the box. For seasoned Linux users they can be more picky with which their distro but as an intro to Linux I always recommend mint and Ubuntu.
I’m currently on family vacation for a week. If someone were to bring up Trump or Israel or reproductive rights, there would be arguments and probably some hurt feelings. So no one is mentioning them. It’s not that none of us hold strong opinions, it’s that we’re not making politics the focus of every moment and every interaction when our goal is to spend some time as a family.
Just like if I were to meet a random person like you in the real world, Trump would not be my go-to casual conversation topic.
Here online, I’m generally intentionally looking for political topics.
For multiplayer, look at Steam charts for most active players. Any of the top 20+ games are probably worth playing, even if old.
I recently got into The Division 2 and that’s YEARS old. There isn’t much multiplayer until you reach endgame (very quick for essentially an MMO) but then there’s a decent community still.
I used term “them” because I couldn’t tell if a customer’s name was female or male, so I had to listen to his wife go on about how tired she is with genders.
Like, ma’am, I thought ya’ll might have been lesbians and I was just trying to be polite. It’s not that serious.
Not sure, since it’s a sliding scale, but high idealism can end up being kind of problematic. See any number of creepy or patriarchal things that romcoms tend to promote. Since it’s two women the risk of falling into that is reduced, though.
Separate components that do one thing and only that thing and does it well are good. Extra containers are basically free.
The exporters provide the metrics. They can be standalone executables like the node exporter, can also be included in apps themselves easily since it’s just HTTP. It’s trivial to add metrics to just about anything without needing extra ports. Its protocol is also easier and more efficient than SNMP.
Prometheus scrapes those metrics and stores it into its database. In other apps that’d be the role things like PostgreSQL have: you don’t really use it directly, but it’s no less important.
Grafana is the frontend you slap in front of Prometheus to actually display your metrics.
Alertmanager looks at the metrics and sends alerts. It’s separate because if your Prometheus box goes down, how are you gonna be alerted of that?
All 4 of those can be swapped with something else equivalent and it all still works. Don’t like the UI? Replace Grafana. Don’t like Prometheus? There’s VictoriaMetrics and InfluxDB
It looks silly on a small scale, but it scales up very well. Couple hundred VMs per Prometheus install, node exporters on every VM and a single Grafana cluster to visualize the data for the whole infrastructure at once.
That makes it all well liked in enterprise which means there are exporters for damn near anything (even the Lemmy server has a built-in exporter I can scrape with Prometheus), which in turn makes it the easy solution for self-hosters too, and here we are.
I feel like it’s easier to set up than some of the all in one solutions I’ve used previously, despite being several components. They’re all components that basically just work out of the box.
I believe you are looking for hydrostatic equilibrium. There don’t seem to be good answers for this online, but according to Robert Black on this Quora post:
There isn’t a minimium per se but the generally accepted number for a mass to form into a sphere under its own gravity is 1/10,000th the mass of the Earth or 600 quintillion kg. As for size, it really depends on the composition of the body. The numbers are generally accepted to have a diameter of about 600km for a rocky body.
A quintillion is 1 x 10 to the 18th and Phobos has a mass of 1.0659 x 10 to the 16th kilograms and a diameter of 22 kilometers.
Oh, holy hell, I just uncontrollably giggled at that for so long, my chest hurts. I sent it to my only group of friends, and it looks even better in smaller thumbnail form. Good gracious.
You start out with bare minimum and install what you need. As you go you generally have an idea of what is and isn’t on your system. It’s not as annoying as Gentoo with all source compiling, not as anal as nix.
If something breaks, you go to ArchLinux.org and 95% of the time it’s mentioned on the front page so you follow the instructions and move on. It’s a very transparent distro, little drama to follow unlike Ubuntu/canonical or fedora/redhat.
It used to be harder to install and which gave some street cred, but they simplified it a bit which is nice.
The Stans give an unbalanced look at arch. I use arch because I want the latest packages, I don’t want to segment my packages between my repos and tarballs when there’s a game stopping missing feature on a package pinned to a 2yo version. I don’t want to learn a whole scripting language to carefully craft my OS like nix either. I want a current OS that’s easy to fix and easy to install packages so I can go back to what I was doing.
kbin.life
Active