R*dd*t refugee

Fuck /u/Spez

  • 0 Posts
  • 24 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 17th, 2023
  • SpaceCadet2000@kbin.socialtoLinux@lemmy.ml•Former distrohoppers, where did you settle down?
    181·
    9 months ago

    I settled on two.

    1. Arch for my desktop, because there I like having an always up-to-date system with the latest drivers and libraries so that I can always try the latest versions of whatever it is I want to play with next. Pacman is also a pretty good package manager, and almost any piece of software that is not in the default repos can be found in the AUR. For the rest, I also like that Arch just gets out of your way and lets you configure your system how you want.

    2. Debian for anything that runs unattended, like all my homelab services. It’s well tested, offers feature stability, has long-enough support, and doesn’t do weird things every other release like forcing snaps or netplan or cloud-init on you. Those “boring” qualities make it the perfect base to run something for a long time that doesn’t scream for attention all the time.

  • SpaceCadet2000@kbin.socialtoMemes@lemmy.ml•It do be like that
    6·
    1 year ago

    The original meaning of the word as I first heard it back in the late 1990s was to refer to the vast majority of “normal” people who don’t have an interest in or deep understanding of technology and internet culture.

    I don’t think it was originally meant as an insult, but more as an acknowledgement and reminder to ourselves that the things we were into and cared about were a niche thing and not exactly the norm.

    Nowadays, I’ve heard it applied to just about any niche interest or hobby, for example: people who are not into mechanical keyboards would also be “normies”, and worse it’s being thrown around as a direct insult to people, in the same vein as calling someone “basic”.

  • SpaceCadet2000@kbin.socialtoTechnology@beehaw.org•Monkey scripts for Lemmy UI to replicate compact layout from old.reddit
    1·
    1 year ago

    I general why does there have to be static sidebars that are rarely used. It causes the content body to be squeezed into tiny space.

    I think the rationale is that most people use widescreen monitors nowadays, so if you allow the content part to run across the entire width of the screen, it becomes ugly and hard to read. Therefore the middle section gets a limited or fixed width, which in turn then creates two empty columns to the sides that designers are then tempted to fill up with “useful” stuff.

    You can try this yourself: paste a long line of text into a notepad window and maximize the window. It is much harder on your eyes to read and focus on the text than if you resized the window to a more reasonable width where the text gets broken up into several lines.

    I’m not against this design paradigm per se, but the content width reduction is often overdone, leading to a squeezed feeling like you say. It can also create problems if you have a habit of not using maximized browser windows, but for example a window tiled to one half of the screen. Some of the better sites work around this by having a reactive design that reduces, collapses or removes the sidebars when the window is narrower than a certain width, but many sites don’t.