The guys was committed for two weeks and had threatened to shoot up a national guard base. They had the information to act on and take away his guns and they didn’t because they didn’t need to. This is even more fucked because it was probably avoidable.
There are no red flag laws in Maine. There was no legal way to take his guns even if they thought that was necessary. Also, the christofacist supreme court is set to strike down laws that prevent people convicted domestic violence from owning guns, which will chip away at the legality of red flag laws everywhere. Happy Thursday everyone!
People get wrapped around the axle about this. If you don’t know the military doesn’t turn you into John Wick. Most people in the military have never been issued a gun outside of qual, but all are given a bare minimum level of training just in case things got dire.
Annual (if that) weapons training is basically “don’t tk your buddies 101” a bit of shooting to prove you can and cleaning after. You only get more if direct combat is your actual job, or will be soon.
Just like anything else if you want to get good you have to put in some effort on your own time.
I read your reply as “He was a weapons instructor and therefore cannot burn a fuse and go on a psychotic rampage”. I believe that is what the exchange was about before you replied. The question people are asking is “Why did he have guns” and not “How was he trained to use them”.
That’s not what I’m saying. He had a pretty good “why” for having easy access to weapons until he was checked into a mental institution. If he was a danger to himself or others I bet they could have prevented him from getting weapons. I’m interested to see why they chose not to or how their attempts failed.
I admit it was a deviation from the subject and might have been confusing. Every time this guy’s background is brought up people tend to think military training is some forbidden knowledge that citizens don’t have access to, which isn’t the case at all.
It’s not about listening, it’s about the commander issuing an order, which has the same weight as a judge issuing a warrant, to actually take the weapons from his possession/home. An order that MPs and local law enforcement can legally go and execute.
Though I think this whacko is ultimately responsible for this ill and evil shit, I think the commander might’ve been negligent here not doing more. (If indeed the gunmen was institutionalized, and the commander was aware of that fact.)
And yes, I think the lack of any red flag laws in that state is insane, and that such laws likely could’ve helped here. I’m just making a point that more realistically could’ve have been done given the situation as it existed in that moment.
Imagine doing a business if Google one day start to hate you.
No listing on most popular and the only search engine that counts. Most popular browser gives a big red warning for your website. Even with different browser it won’t connect due to Google being the most popular DNS provider. No app on the only widely used app store on Android - the only OS phone manufactures use besides Apple. Your app is automatically uninstalled on >99% Android phones. Your calls gets blocked by Android spam detector. Your e-mails get blocked by Gmail. And besides that, Google would pumps all of your competition up.
That much power over the market is very dangerous and should not be legal.
Back in the day, when bandwidth was precious and porn sites would parcel a video into 10 second extracts, one per page, you could zip a bunch of these mpeg files together into an uncompressed zip, then rename it .mpeg and read it in VLC as a single video. Amazing stuff.
TAR stands for Tape ARchive. It’s called that because it’s designed to be written to (and read from) non-seekable magnetic tape, meaning it’s written linearly. The metadata for each file (name, mtime etc.) immediately precedes its contents. There is no global table of contents like you’d find on an actual filesystem. In fact, most implementations of tar don’t even put the separate files on gzip boundaries meaning you can’t decompress any given file without decompressing all of the files before it. With a tape backup system, you don’t care, but with a filesystem you absolutely do.
PKZIP mimics the traditional filesystem structure much more closely. The table of contents is at the end instead of the beginning, which is a bit strange as filesystems go, but it is a table of contents consisting of a list of filenames and offsets into the file where they can be found. Each file in a zip archive is compressed separately, meaning you can pull out any given file from a ZIP archive without any prior state, and you can even use different compression algorithms on a per-file basis (few programs make use of this). For obvious reasons, the ZIP format prioritizes storage space over modification speed (the table of contents is a single centralized list and files must be contiguous), meaning if you tried to use it as a filesystem it would utterly suck – but you can very readily find software that will let you read, edit, and delete files in-place as though it were a folder without rewriting the entire archive. That’s not really possible with a .tar file.
You could make the argument that tar is able to more closely mimic a POSIX filesystem since it captures the UNIX permission bits and ZIP doesn’t (ustar was designed for UNIX and pkzip was designed for DOS) but that’s not a great metric.
xls & co. (the older ones) are something custom. Only after standardization as OOXML (a shitshow btw, there’s a lengthy wiki article about it) they got zip.
The whole Word and Libre/OO-Writer world is a shit show.
So complex and everyone decides to interpret it a bit differently.
Not even Libre and OO can be interoperabel between the same file and feature.
Ah, last time I checked it was a kind of ML directly (XML, I’m guessing from [email protected] their comment), but that’s back in Office 2016’s time, so things might have changed.
See, ZIP files are strange because unlike most other archive formats, they put the “header” and table of contents at the end, and all of the members (files within the zip file) are listed in that table of contents as offsets relative to the start of the file. There’s nothing that says that the first member has to begin at the start of the file, or that they have to be contiguous. This means you can concatenate an arbitrary amount of data at the beginning of a ZIP file (such as an exe that opens its argv[0] as a zip file and extracts it) and it will still be valid. (Fun fact! You can also concatenate up to 64KiB at the end and it will still be valid, after you do some finagling. This means that when a program opens a ZIP file it has to search through the last 64KiB to find the “header” with the table of contents. This is why writing a ZIP parser is really annoying.)
As long as whatever’s parsing the .exe doesn’t look past the end of its data, and whatever’s parsing the .zip doesn’t look past the beginning of its data, both can go about their business blissfully unaware of the other’s existence. Of course, there’s no real reason to concatenate an executable with a zip file that wouldn’t access the zip file, but you get the idea.
A common way to package software is to make a self-extracting zip archive in this manner. This is absolutely NOT to say that all .exe files are self extracting .zip archives.
Sigh, my condolences. I’m shouting right beside you. I first learned about linux in 1993 in college. I got it working on a shiny new 486 with super vga graphics. We were allowed access to the college’s aix mainframes and thus the internet via a slip connection - but only through Unix like systems. Linux was amazing, I couldn’t believe we had x going, and loading up cad, matlab, maple, ftp, fsp, irc, nettrek, and everything else possible in the computer centers - but over a telephone line from our apartment.
Magical.
Funny how it really only became my daily driver three ish years ago - despite using it forever. Cuz games - glad that’s changed finally.
Sometimes it’s better if your employer doesn’t know everything you can do. If you’re not careful you’ll end up Inventory Controller/shipper/IT services/reception/Safety officer, and you’ll only ever be paid for whatever your initial position was.
I wanted to be a system engineer, I got hired as a devops, I started doing a bit of system engineer, called hr and said that I’m working on infrastructure and I need my title changed or else I won’t be able to continue my work, my title was changed, no I do system engineer stuff and less of devops, this was a very rare occasion but it can happen from time to time.
Well it depends, I had gotten offers double and triple my yearly pay to move to the capital or go outside of my country for a system engineer position. Devops pays more in the US, for around 20-30k MORE per year, but other salaries in the US and other salaries in EU.
Personally I like system engineer/architect jobs more, DevOps is nice but lacks creativity.
I would swap Python with C++. Constantly dealing with stupid runtime errors that could’ve been easily captured during compile time.
Did you forget to rename this one use of the variable at the end of the program? Sucks for you, because I won’t tell you about it until after 30 minutes into the execution.
Shouldn’t be forgetting for one off scripts either, if that’s the logic you want to go with.
The tool exists, either you do it or you don’t and end up getting an error until the interpreter hits that line. It’s just the nature of being compiled at runtime.
Then maybe use an editor with a decent linter and check the problems tab or just red line markers?? I also have those kind of runtime errors sometimes but I take the blame.
TDD only works well if the problem is clearly specified before the first line of code has been written, which is rarely the case when I need Python for something.
So which is then? You want a one off script to just quickly crunch some numbers on a problem you still need to understand? Because that is where it is perfectly normal to get some errors and doodle around. That is the entire point of it.
Or you have a concise concept of what you are going to do, and how and why? Because that is what you do, when you program more than a “one off”.
Either you go to the store with a shopping list and you work through that list or you go browsing and see what comes up. But don’t expect to be as fast and have everything you needed, when you dont write your shopping list at home.
Often I use Python for exploratory purposes. Like, I got a bunch of data, and I want to know if a particular algorithm might work or not. I implement the algorithm, but realize the results don’t look good enough. So I tweak the algorithm, maybe even do major refactoring. Or maybe I realize my visualizations or metrics don’t capture what I need to see. Or maybe I must settle for some compromise?
I iterate on this repeatedly until I find something I’m happy about (or until I give up). Sometimes I end up with something completely different from my initial idea.
TDD won’t help me much here because the end result is unknown. For each iteration of this idea process I might even need to rewrite all the tests because none of them are valid anymore.
Mostly number crunching and data exploration tasks. Just so I can make informed decisions about the data I got. I do this rarely enough so it hasn’t been worth for me to install all these extra third party support wheels.
It doesn’t need to have large complex scopes. I have the brain of a goldfish. I program because it’s challenging. It’s challenging because I’m bad at it.
Catching some errors is better than catching no errors. No compiler in any language can protect you from all runtime errors either way, but some are better at it than others.
Seriously though, writing a monolith of a function and not testing anything until you run it the first time isn’t the way to go. Even with a compiler you’re only going to catch syntactical and type issues. No compiler in the world is going to tell you you forgot to store your data in the correct variable, although it or a a linter may have helped you realize you weren’t using it anywhere else.
Agreed. Mypy pre-commit hooks are very useful if you’re starting a fresh project. Adding typing to an existing project which reuses variables with different types… We lost weeks to it.
I guess as a C# guy I’ve never had to deal with an issue like this. Most of the time the exceptions are pretty easy to diagnose unless it’s in the UI or in some async function.
I’ve been aware long enough of big gaps in the libraries of streaming services that there was never a reason to give it up.
It took until fucking March of this fucking year for Spotify to have any old De La Soul to stream. Good thing I’ve had a high quality rip of their early discography for fifteen fucking years. Otherwise I would have been shit outta luck on listening to them.
I couldn’t stream a killer album from fucking 1989 in 2022. There continue to be massive gaps in their libraries due to licensing issues and people who just don’t want to get underpaid by Spotify.
The fact that visual collage can exist so easily, and yet audio collage is facing an uphill battle, some 40 years later, feels like a big indicator that copyright law in the US still needs a massive overhaul
I think a lot for the guys that follow these morons and buy into this culture did not have positive male role models growing up, thus turn to media for some guidance.
This does not excuse their conduct or self-delusion, but does explain why it happens.
I’m in no way excusing their villanry, but most are so delusional that they won’t ever take a hard look at the way they are and wonder if they could be something else or if they need to change
I mainly feel bad with the young men who are not yet captured but are down that path. I’d like to think it couldn’t have happened to me but I had the luxery of going through that time of my life when that stuff wasn’t really around.
Though actually I had 4chan at that time and I turned out mostly well adjusted so they’re not completely blame-free.
people seem to think if you’re not in support of them or their position, then you haven’t experienced the same things and been on the same path. I saw where I was going and specifically changed it.
I’m still a depressed, alone, piece of shit, but I’m not a bigoted, fascist piece of shit.
Empathy doesn’t have to mean letting them do whatever they want. It’s the only path to reforming them. I’ve worked with a young kid with no dad in the process of going down this pipeline. You have to challenge them on what they think they’ve learned about being a man, but if you don’t try to understand how they feel they will just shut you out. Ultimately you can’t make someone believe something. So you either give up and label them a lost cause, or you actually try to reach them and convince them person to person.
What do you think they should have done differently? I am excusing their behaviour but I want to understand what should anyone with no positive male role model do other than turn to the internet?
well people can be both, victims of circumstance AND be accountable to their own agency that’s life its complicated and ambiguous. I bet like 20% of people with male socialization and no good role models haven’t become complete dicks
It’s not the fact that they’re on the internet, it’s the fact that being on the internet doesn’t inherently make them good.
Of course a boy subconsciously looking for guidance will find these guys and feel inspired or compelled by them. But maturity is the concept of learning from experience and challenging your own understanding in order to be a more balanced and level-headed person tomorrow. You know, exactly what these guys try to stop.
So the only thing these kids can do is embrace growing up, becoming mature, and finding role model figures that champion that instead of ones that peddle the arrested development that these charlatans do.
I find it crazy that I didn’t really have any real male role models, but the media I turned to ended up being guys like Henry Rollins.
The “finding myself” period of my life pre-dated the existence of this manosphere/shallow-ass-masculinity shit, but the archetype has been around for far longer and there were plenty of slimy douchebags to look up to. Sometimes I wonder what spared me.
No no, that’s a farse and a uniquely human construct. Name me even one other species of creature that utilizes anything even remotely similar to money to survive…
We don’t need money to survive, we just submit ourselves to the government that orders us to use it.
Edit: I guess the downvoters don’t understand any other way of life, like owning a piece of dirt you can live on and grow your own farm and survive self sufficiently…
And yeah it sucks, I’m not in a self sufficient area myself anymore, because government and corporations have taken that from most of us.
Point is, if money didn’t exist in the first place, we wouldn’t literally have to pay for a box and piece of dirt to sleep on.
That’s basically the original scam, charging people to have somewhere to sleep. Like, doesn’t the Earth belong to all of us? Why do we live in a society where not only do you have to pay for facilities, you can’t even grow your own garden in said facilities?
We’re literally paying to get screwed. Everyone should have the right to find themselves a piece of dirt and go build themselves a log cabin and a farm if they so choose.
Again, humans are totally capable of being self sufficient, we’re just too fucking lazy and oppressed by big business and government to do anything about it.
Other species don’t need clean water, clothes, complex tools and growing food. This makes their life simpler yet limits their number and habitat.
Try to live in a village growing own food. It’s a hard work, especially if you have cattles or other domestic animals. Villagers work from early morning to evening because there’s a lot things to do. Living in a city is much easier.
Is it not true though that this is seasonal and overall people that live this way work less than the average person living a modern life?
It is not like you get home from work and have no chores etc. Realistically a lot of the work these people do is something that a person with a house would call chores / upkeep.
I don’t deny that the labour is physically harder, I’ve worked in my life retail, office and landscaping, I know that physical labour is tough. Though hard overall is subjective, I undoubtedly hated and found most every other job harder than my stint of about a year in landscaping, which was physically very taxing. The landscaping gig might have been the favorite job I’ve ever had.
But, no, I am not talking about people who work as farmers / labourers commercially, but instead the question is mostly about self sustained homestead / village living.
Growing uo I had small scale farmers in my family and had a countryside house where I knew a lot of the beighbours who lived there full time. Generally they seemed to have a couple of bursts of work during a day but most of the day was slowly and steadily attending to one or another chore / upkeep task
I would vager people living this way actually work far less hours in a given year than a person living a modern capitalist life, especially if you factor upkeep you have to do for your house after work etc, even if we assume a 40 hour work week, which lets face it, the average person probably exceeds (64 hours for me, personally).
Oh I work for the government my friend. I actively disrupt those meetiings, I complain out loud that they could have been an email, I take great joy in pointing out that none of our “feedback” is ever implemented and that the meetings are an ego massaging exercise.
Consequently, 75% of the regular attendees like me and 25% want to stab me really bad, but we do now have fewer meetings.
I sometimes send emails that probably should have been meetings. Here’s a couple pages of dense text and bullet points, I’ll need your feedback on most of it, so please get back to me ASAP with an equally long email, thanks.
Yeah but doing it through email still has so many benefits. You can refer back to it years later if needed, you can think out and rewrite your points, include someone else later without restating everything…
Nah, into our airplane seats! See, if we're all in claw machine seats, they don't need aisles so we can get crammed in even closer together. No more wasting time with overhead bins: when you're in the terminal, you put your carry-on in the bin under your seat, close the lid, and sit down. Then the claw machine scans your ticket, picks you and your seat up and deposits you in the right slot - no more wasting the airline's time holding up the line while someone tries to steal your seat or misreads a row number or fumbles with the overhead bins.
Once you land, they empty the plane by running a full-row claw machine, and then the entire plane is an empty shell, making it easy to clean. The empty seats themselves can be cleaned in the terminals between flights - hell, they can probably set up some kind of conveyor belt autoclean system.
I wonder how much it would cost to bribe the FAA and NTSB to sign off on this concept? .....
I’ll give you “new” but it’s about as far from exotic as you can get… Not a bad thing, BTW, and I highly recommend giving it a try, it’s an excellent system, though probably better for a server than a workstation/desktop (though it definitely can be a very good workstation/desktop if you like)
Its Ports system is the inspiration for Gentoo’s Portage, BTW
“hello system” is pretty nice to look at, and has some Mac-isms I find helpful. FreeBSD has a new release recently, so maybe Nomad or GhostBSD could be worth trying. You’ll find FreeBSD is a lot more “consistent” compared to Linux, but be prepared for random hardware to not work.
That’s a GPL point of view. Most BSD users I’ve talked to prefer a more permissive license. Theo said: “GPL fans said the great problem we would face is that companies would take our BSD code, modify it, and not give back. Nope – the great problem we face is that people would wrap the GPL around our code, and lock us out in the same way that these supposed companies would lock us out. Just like the Linux community, we have many companies giving us code back, all the time. But once the code is GPL’d, we cannot get it back. Ironic.”
Which is fine with for example OpenBSD, they write “ISC or Berkeley style licences are preferred, the GPL is not acceptable when adding new code, NDAs are never acceptable. We want to make available source code that anyone can use for ANY PURPOSE, with no restrictions. We strive to make our software robust and secure, and encourage companies to use whichever pieces they want to.”
And where system is doing better, Linux or BSD? Also the point of the GPL is not to give back. You can have GPL code that is read only and it doesn’t hurt a thing. The point is you can get the code running on your computer and freely make changes to it.
Doing better in what way? Number of installs or being robust and secure? If we go by numbers one could argue that Windows is doing best on the desktop, and that proprietary code therefore is something to strive for. Either way it’s a tangent of the original statement, that the BSD license is a “pushover” license, which I oppose, because the BSD devs are deliberately allowing their code to be used by anyone for any reason.
We decided that everyone in the team is allowed to approve changes. If no one has reviewed your change within 24 hours you are allowed to approve it yourself. It will usually come up in the daily sync that a self approval is imminent, which usually leads to someone taking a look.
Self-approval leads to a road of sadness. For example, a theoretical company needs to self-renew an ssl cert. No problem, the cert will be stored with the rest of the secrets and retrieved in a secure way on deployment. Unfortunately if you don’t store the cert key in a secure way, the deployment still works fine and you don’t need to figure out the “onerous” encryption process.
So you push the private key to the company git repo, and then deploy the cert! Done and Done.
We have well established ways to deal with secrets. Also, everyone is responsible enough to not self approve changes where they do things they are uncertain of.
If you don’t establish an encryption mechanism for secrets that allows for automatic, in memory decryption on deployment from the start of your project, then your project is run by incompetent developers/ops specialists/architects/management/etc. and deserves to fail.
Who said anything about only requiring 1 reviewer? And no, I did not drop an /s. You should try working for a healthy team where everyone takes collective responsibility and where the teams progress is more important than any one person’s progress.
I get the feeling you feel like I was somehow calling you out. I want to clarify the the intent of my message was more in the spirit of “wow must be nice” than “you’re making that up”. But also I’m just interested in how different your experience is from mine.
Who said anything about only requiring 1 reviewer?
I must have misunderstood. You said “If no one has reviewed your change within 24 hours you are allowed to approve it yourself.” To me, that sounds like, after 24 hours of no review, one self-approval is considered sufficient. That, in turn, seems to imply that before 24 hours, one non-self-approval is probably sufficient, no?
You should try working for a healthy team where everyone takes collective responsibility and where the teams progress is more important than any one person’s progress.
I’ve had team members in the past who are very self-focused, they tend to close a lot of tickets and look good, then get promoted out, leaving an unmaintainable mess behind. Allowing that is generally a failure of leadership. But right now, that’s not our problem, and what you describe is pretty much how we operate.
I’d love to work on a team where everybody took code review a lot more seriously, believe me, it’d be nice, but my team does generally get everything approved, with at least two non-self approvals, in under 24 hours. If something is getting ignored because people are busy and it’s a large change because we aren’t perfect, and there is some reason to get it in soon, it just takes a quick request on Slack to get the needed attention.
What I found surprising about your description was more that the potential of a self-approval coming up would, in itself, get people’s attention, rather than somebody reaching out personally and asking for a review.
Our big weakness is review quality, not quantity. It’s crazy the number of times I look at something and see the two or three approvals already, start going through it, and find issue after issue. I see that on other teams as well, where there’s usually only one or two devs who ever really make any comments on a review, it seems to be very common.
Some people including OP are completely missing the point of torrenting, which is to share, not leech. If everyone removed their torrents like the OP, everything would quickly become unavailable and die.
IMO a better strategy is to just limit your global upload speed. Then at least you’re still making everything healthy and available, even if its distributed slowly.
So he want the game to get to 10 millions player on steam deck only then support it, but without supporting it the game won’t get to 10 millions player. It’s not a linux problem Tim, it’s you.
And look how late they were when it came to launching their own digital platform. I’m not taking about games being on PC.
This is a company that saw consoles more worth putting resources towards and didn’t see it worth it too start their own Steam competitor even back in 2008.
Every gaming company basically thought the PC was dead for gaming, only to be relegated to nerd paying high prices for hardware to play niche nerdy shit.
Honestly I still don’t know what changed, even Japanese devs are releasing on PC again, it’s a weird time.
Well apparently Valve didn’t get the memo. By the time PS3 came out and the further into the Gen it got it became clearer that digital was the way forward. And you’d think a company with PC roots would have gotten their own digital distribution platform started once steam sales caught on.
The whole everyone thought pc was dead excuse is a poor one because Epic took until 2018 to bother with their own distribution platform. That’s a hell of a long time and too many years from the PC is dead excuse.
That’s what I mean by many many many missed chances. They had over a decade to enter as it became more and more obvious the money there was to be made from PC gamers.
Why should they have a distribution platform? Pretty much every game except , and at least I never considered a digital distribution platform as a kid since boxed games worked just fine. I didn’t have a Steam account until Steam came to Linux, yet I played plenty of PC games in the meantime on both Windows and Linux. I bought a mixture of boxed games and online downloads, I didn’t need a launcher to do that for me.
Yes, they missed the boat, but it wasn’t obvious that the boat was going where they wanted to go. Valve took that risk and won big, but other large studios didn’t and were absolutely fine focusing on game dev, and it wasn’t until recently that they wanted in.
PC gaming has only had a slow, steady rise since Steam entered the scene. But perhaps one other catalyst might have been the Games For Windows initiative (not "Live") that standardized controller support, added some extra marketing oomph, and gave more incentive to make the same game on PC and console rather than making two entirely different games (sometimes with the same title, like Ghost Recon Advanced Warfighter).
Yes that’s correct. They seemed dismissive of it even back in 2008 seeing more cons than potential in the market. It’s like the Windows approach to smartphones entering in after Android and iOS established themselves. Except even later with years and years passing as it became clearer PC gaming was becoming more accessible and it’s own formidable market. They missed a lot of earlier chances to enter.
Isn’t he the asshole who threw a tantrum about pirates and swore to never release on pc again? Dude is just a worthless little bitch that doesn’t actually care about industry in the slightest. Every success epic has ever had has been in spite of him.
They don’t have to release on Linux at all!!
All they have to do is click a checkbox in the EAC SDK & contact Battleye to support Valve’s Proton & that’s it!! It is a Tim Sweeney problem.
Also, Unreal Engine, which the Epic Games Launcher was built in for some reason also has a checkmark for Linux, and they refuse to tick it. It’s to the point that while it is possible to do development for Unreal on Linux, they had to build a completely different way to get it up and running since the launcher doesn’t support Linux.
They consciously make efforts not to support Linux, it would literally take less effort to do it.
To be entirely fair this is much less of a “tick the Linux box” solution, you actually have to program thing differently to work on Linux in that case. They obviously have the resources to do it but it’s less infuriating than the literal single click it would take to enable EAC on Linux on $game.
Fortnite loads fine on Linux but closes after reaching the main menu. It doesn’t crash, it closes. They’re actively blocking the community from self-supporting.
There have even been times when Fortnite’s anti cheat was broken so that you could actually play the game perfectly fine on Linux.
I also once managed to get long enough into a game to be yelled at because the mic is open by default (which happened to be my laptop mic). Then I got kicked by anti cheat.
Yeah, but to be fair, maybe that fact about the EAC SDK isn’t common knowledge. I mean, we know it in our community, but a Windows-only game dev like Epic might not quite notice.
If that’s the case, then maybe whoever owns EAC could get some good publicity if they could convince Tim Sweeney to do a public stunt like livestreaming the process of opening up the config for Fortnite, enabling it for Proton, and then testing it on the Steam Deck. EAC gets good publicity, and Fortnite gets all the extra revenue from the Steam Deck users.
Of course, Tim Sweeney wouldn’t reach out on his own, he’s probably got far too many bigger things to do. It’s up to whoever owns EAC to get that ball rolling and schedule a meeting with Sweeney to make this proposal and see if they can make it work.
Does anyone know who that second person is? Not Tim Sweeney (the guy who probably doesn’t realize how easy it is to enable this in EAC), but the other person (the person who owns EAC)? Because trying to get through to that first guy is a challenge, so maybe we can get that second person to try their hand at it.
Yes, generating a Linux build wouldn’t require a lot of changes to the code.
But if they support Linux, they have to support Linux. This is not some student’s first indie game, but instead a massive game with up to 290 million monthly active users. That’s 3.7% of the whole world’s population! (And it’s also more than the number of total Linux users.)
So supporting Linux means they need to test on at least all currently maintained versions of maybe the top 20 or so distros on all sorts of hardware configurations. That would increase their testing costs by around a factor of 20.
They also need to support customers if they have problems. Considering the variability of Linux configurations, chances are high that this comparatively small segment of players will consume an aproportional amount of difficult support requests.
And lastly, if the Linux version of the game has some serious bugs on some setup, it might likely be that all these Linux users think the game is shit and start talking badly about it.
So it’s just a simple cost calculation: Does Linux support increase or decrease the total profit?
And if the variables change, the calculation changes with it. Exactly as Sweeny said in his post. People like Sweeny don’t care about ideals or about which OS they prefer. They only care about money.
And the revelation that a CEO likes money and dislikes risk isn’t exactly hard to figure out.
Then they get bad press for cheaters using Linux or whatever due to some bug they easily could’ve caught during the QA they didn’t do. So they either need to scramble to fix it, or pull Linux support and block those older versions from connecting.
All of that is worse than never supporting Linux in the first place. So if they’re going to support it, they’re going to need to do proper QA and get their support staff trained to deal with Linux issues.
A smaller studio or something with SP only mode can get away with it, but it’s a lot more tricky for big MP games.
Can and should are very different things. Here are some big differences to understand why it doesn’t make sense for Fortnite, but it might make sense for Apex:
Fortnite isn’t on Steam, so the only people who would play it on Linux are enthusiasts and cheaters (if it’s easier than on Windows)
Fortnite has way more players than Apex - the possible pool for new users is likely much smaller for Fortnite, and the potential for making money is higher with getting current users to spend than attracting new ones, and they have more users to lose with bad press
Fortnite doesn’t have to be on steam to work. The only thing they’d likely have to change is removing the steam runtime, assuming Epic were to make a Linux store front, which is completely unnecessary because we already have our own solutions : Legendary/Heroic & Lutris. lemmy.world/comment/6020626
Just like how Valve worked with Epic to get EAC working, they also worked with Battleye to get Battleye working, just have to contact Battleye to enable it.
It’s literally just another runtime.
B-Bu-But cheaters
There’s cheaters on every single platform, I can deadass cheat in fortnite from my android phone, PS4, Windows PC, and everything in between. What’s 2 more cheater’s per thousands more users.
Fuck, I can use an external raspberry pi and bypass their kernel lvl tamper protection in a snap.
And again, if Apex can detect people cheating on Linux from server side like EAC and Battleye is supposed to in the first place, then so can Epic Games.
Please stop defending this bullshit, Epic Games has everything in their power to support Linux and their excuses are merely just that, excuses.
I’m sick and tired of people shilling for this POS mega corp with the same bs arguments.
I’m not saying it needs be on Steam to work, I’m saying it needs to be on Steam to be popular on the Steam Deck since the install process is otherwise quite involved. So if they just enable Proton in EAC, they’ll only get a handful of enthusiasts (who are probably playing on another platform anyway) and open themselves up to Linux-specific cheats.
so can Epic Games
I’m not saying they can’t, I’m saying it’s probably not profitable for them to do so. They’re not going to get many new users if they support Linux, so the net impact is that they’ll have another platform for support requests and potential cheats.
Apex is on Steam, so the barrier to play their game on Linux/Steam Deck is really low (just enable and potential users are now ~2% higher). So for them, turning on Linux support is probably profitable since they’ll convert a lot more people on that platform.
Please stop defending
What am I defending? I’m explaining why it likely doesn’t make business sense for Epic to support Linux. My point here isn’t to claim that Epic is doing something good here, but to show it’s probably not some weird hatred of Linux, but a business choice. Some of it is also probably a rivalry with Valve, but I don’t think Sweeney would let that get in the way of profits if push came to shove. Sweeney’s main goal AFAICT is to make money, not to stick it to some competitor.
Yes, Epic could support Linux pretty quickly if they chose to. They’re choosing not to, most likely because it won’t make them as much money as other efforts would. It’s really not complicated.
You can install other store fronts on Steam Deck with ease. It’s called flatpak : lutris, heroic.
The install process is not that involved, we can literally install fortnite right now on steam deck.
Hell, it even briefly ran on Steam Deck in 2022 when they fucked up and the Anti-cheat was half broken.
I’m saying it’s probably not profitable for them to do so.
My point here isn’t to claim that Epic is doing something good here, but to show it’s probably not some weird hatred of Linux, but a business choice.
Yeah, Epic totally killed the pre-existing, and flawlessly working Linux version of Rocket League when they acquired the studio and then refused to refund because “meh profits, leh business choice” (ಠ_ಠ)>⌐■-■
They couldn’t possibly have a hard on for fucking over Linux users.
The fact they even still allow it to run under proton is a fuckin miracle, or rather they know that’d they get bad PR as it’s already proven to be viable.
Also, don’t you find it fucking hilarious how they fired a fuck load of developers and then Tim goes “if only we had more developers” 💀
Yes, I have those installed as well, and it’s not hard. But it’s a barrier for mass adoption. I’m interested to know how many people who own a Steam Deck actually have Lutris or Heroic installed, and how many of those actually use it. I have both, but I’ve only used them a handful of times. My guess is less than half have either installed, and less than half of those use them.
So we’re looking at a fraction of an already small group of users, and the vast majority who would use it to play Fortnite already play on another supported platform. So why should Epic go out of their way to support it? The playerbase isn’t there, so there’s really not much economic incentive to do so.
Rocket League
That’s a separate issue IMO. They wanted it exclusive on EGS (mostly for sweet sweet MTX profit), and EGS didn’t (and still doesn’t) support Linux. So their choice is one of the following:
keep the Steam version, but only for Linux users - that’s really odd
port EGS to Linux - probably not worth it, since they’d also be expected to port a bunch of other stuff as well
kill Rocket League Linux port - loses some customers (like me), but ultimately is probably cheaper long term
They knew they’d lose some users in the EGS switch, but the point with Rocket League wasn’t to maximize players of RL, but to maximize users of EGS, which they hope would result in higher total sales on the platform. If you’re already on EGS for RL, maybe you’ll try Fortnite and get hooked. It’s a harder sell if you can still use your platform of choice.
Epic wants to sell EGS exclusives and make that MTX recurring revenue. That’s why they bought RL, why they made it free, and why is exclusive to EGS. That’s already why they buy these exclusivity agreements, and supporting Linux doesn’t fit in that strategy.
It kinda sucks, but at the end of the day, I have plenty of other options on Steam that I’m not going to bother much (I actually still play SP RL sometimes on Steam when I get a hankering, but I’m boycotting MP). I have never purchased anything from Epic, nor have I played any of their games outside of a quick test to mess with my Steam Deck. It’s an unattractive platform because they don’t support my platform. If they decided to support Linux, maybe I’d give them another shot.
I don’t hate Epic because of it, I totally understand why they’re making the choices they are. I’m not going to go through hoops to play their games until they go through hoops to earn me as a customer. They don’t seem to want that, so whatever. The same is true for Origin (or EA Play out whatever it’s called now), Microsoft Gamepass, UPlay, etc no, and other game platforms, so I just don’t buy from them. Every year Valve earns my business by making more and more games available (I’ve been Linux only since before Steam on Linux was a thing), so they get my money.
It’s one thing to not release for Linux (thanks to wine and proton it’s no Biggie) another thing is to actively sabotage it to run on Linux which some Developers who can’t check a fricking Checkbox in EAC do.
Not preventing Linux use is implicit support, and it opens up another platform for cheaters to exploit. So if it works and your entire game is based on the online, MP experience, you need to QA on all possible platforms to stay on top of cheaters.
Support for Steam Deck != support for Linux version. Steam Deck use Proton to run Windows game on linux seamlessly.
Their direct competitor, Apex Legend, is steam deck verified. Big games like Monster Hunter World/Rise, Cyberpunk, Baldurs Gate 3, Elden Ring, etc etc, all steam deck verified. Check out this page for more info
It’s not a Linux problem, it’s a Tim Sweeny problem.
Support for Steam Deck != support for Linux version.
You are correct , however proton ( and the upstream project wine ) is made for linux not the steam deck , ie a game which works on the steam deck will work on linux in most cases .
proton / wine can also be used to run a lot of non game software made for windows ( though proton is made explicitly for games ) , though I will admit steam has the best ux around running software using wine or proton .
but yes it is a Tim Sweeney problem , not a Linux problem .
something I will also add is that they have at least part of the game running on linux already , unless they are paying a fortune in both licencing and lost performance by running the games servers on windows .
10 million is just an arbitrary number he will not honor when it is reached.
Valve has sold ‘multiple millions’(source) already. The 10 million will probably be reached soon. Not even to mention all the Linux users.
And frankly it’s not a him problem. Nearly every dev refuses to release on Linux (and Mac) because of its small user base.
Yes it is. He does not have to release for Linux. He just needs to allow the anti cheat to run on Proton. This is a simple config change not more. Fortnite will probably run fine on Proton.
lemmy.ml
Top