I have to use Windows on my work computer and I am finding it hard to get FOSS applications on Windows that can do stuff like
The Gold standard in the screen recording world is OBS. It’s not only available for Linux, but also for Windows and, well, is the gold standard. If you ask the question if OBS can do this-or-that regarding screen recording, the answer generally is yes (or “yes, via plugin”). Just use OBS on all platforms, it’s clearly the most mature screen recording tool out there.
WSL2 exists for the very reason, if you hate using Windblows, you can install Linux OS on top and do everything from the Linux VM. Why even bother struggling with Windozes interface and software ?
The only problem is the resource management, if you are using something like MX Linux and you have good amount of RAM, you can do this, I have 8GBs of RAM and even Windows 10 runs into resource issues when I am using it casually (forget working on it).
If you were getting bald (which you might not) you’d have 2 options:
hair transplant (if needed) and medication for the rest of your life.
shave/trim and move on
I’m generally for team 2. I’d hate medicating (which from internet opinion has various long-lasting unwanted side effects) for the rest of my life for such stupid thing.
I must confess, I have the benefit that I don’t look that bad. Also, being fit becomes much more required when bald, 😅, you have to compensate your older look; and side effects from exercise are virtually all positive. So I’ll take it.
I really didn’t want to go the medicine route years back. Like OP Im a guy who always kept it long. I decided to give the basic regimen a try and went with a keeps like service because dermatologists are by far the worst doctors I’ve had to work with.
And although it thinned, the thinning totally stalled, to a point where it’s a little noticable but on a good day isn’t at all.
I haven’t cut my hair in years and despite it being annoying to take care of sometimes, I get to look in the mirror and see the version of myself that I like to see which makes the little bit of medication worth it imo.
I always hated the “just shave it and own it, bro” attitude because damn my hair is part of my identity, I love having it. I’ll put some effort into keeping it.
My approach would be to have the Python script read the serial console of the microcontroller in a loop and parse the text data exchanged through it. Binary can work too but then you’d need to implement the necessary logic to figure out if you’re done reading or not.
Through things like udev rules you can automatically start such a script when the device is detected (i.e. the cable is plugged in).
Something like this should work, depending on the settings of your serial connection:
<span style="color:#323232;">#!/usr/bin/env python3
</span><span style="color:#323232;">import serial
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">ser = serial.Serial(
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> port='/dev/ttyUSB0,
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> baudrate=57600,
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> parity=serial.PARITY_ODD,
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> stopbits=serial.STOPBITS_TWO,
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> bytesize=serial.SEVENBITS
</span><span style="color:#323232;">)
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">while(True):
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> line = ser.readline()
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> # Do something with the line of text that was just read
</span><span style="color:#323232;"> print(line)
</span><span style="color:#323232;">
</span><span style="color:#323232;">ser.close()
</span>
The udev rule depends on how you connect to the device, of course. Also make sure to mark the script as executable if you call it directly. First improvement I’d make is to figure out how to detect the device (instead of hard coding ttyUSB0) and the correct parity settings.
A whole lot of people here don’t read MBFC each day and it shows. They tend to take a single and testable claim and make a decision. It’s really easy to see if the claim is true or false if the claim is specific. They don’t have a habit of taking a big claim and ruling it false because of one small detail like Snopes does.
See, this is what I’m talking about. They don’t fact check articles by specific publishers. They fact check a claim. “Is this statement true”, “did X Y”, etc. they don’t do “is this this article by the guardian true.” That’s a whole separate thing not done by them.
They offer a separate service where they rate the general trustworthiness and bias of a publication but that’s not the same as doing a specific article, is it?
Your comment makes me wonder if you might be confusing them with someone else or are intentionally saying something about them that isn’t accurate. Because your comment is incompatible with what they actually do.
The bot shares the trustworthiness and bias rating for a publication. This entire topic is about that bot. So that’s very obviously what we’re all referring to. I’m not sure if you’re confused or being obtuse.
Here is my view of the conversation. Let me know where I went wrong.
People saying MBFC is biased. Me saying that that’s BS if talking about specific facts checks. Me saying they also offer a bias check for news sources. But that’s not a fact check. You reply saying that they have repeatedly gotten claims by the Guardian UK wrong. Me saying that they don’t fact check whole articles so your statement is inconsistent with the very nature of the type of fact checking they do. You come back saying you are talking about the bias check for the Guardian. Except that’s not what you said in your first comment, is it? You specifically said “failed fact checks of the Guardian UK” which isn’t about their overall rating but about specific facts checks. Their fact checking and their media bias checks are two separate functions.
So when you tell me I’m being obtuse it looks to me like either you didn’t realize that you complained about one thing while confusing it with another or are trying to gaslight me.
The website very clearly has a massive centrist, pro-capitalism bias. By picking and choosing what “fact checks” to include, they can tilt the “fact-based reporting” metric in whatever way they choose.
This metric is what is being included by the bot. That is the topic of conversation. If that metric is biased. It very, very, very clearly is.
So, I’m guessing you’re American. Basically, your country is so fucked up that you call the right wing left wing and you call the far-right right wing. And centrism is like between right wing and far-right. Does that make sense? So when I say it’s centrist, I mean it’s right wing, but not explicitly fascist. Just contributing towards fascism in a “slow and steady” kind of way. You know, classical liberalism, neo-liberal, that kinda stuff.
It’s also very clearly zionist, so calling it centrist was me being a little bit nice.
Left wing is anti-capitalist, right wing is pro-capitalist. Hope that helps.
It used to be very popular, so I don’t know if this qualifies, but I watch a lot of noir and neo-noir. Specifically, I like the ones told from the criminal’s perspective. Films like Double Indemnity, Body Heat and The Postman Always Rings Twice are great places to start.
Thank you! This would have been great if I didn’t get to know about ShareX, FOSS app and it manages screenshots and screenrecordings with many many more features! God bless the devs!
kbin.life
Hot