Is the data and public keys being replicated in the communication between instances? it’s not made clear how the federation actually works, because “enabling users on different servers to share data with end-to-end encryption” (from https://foks.pub/) is something all services with TLS / HTTPS support already do…

Also… one big plus for the OpenPGP HKP protocol is that technically you can self-host your own key in a static HTTPS server with predefined responses and be able to have it interact with other servers and clients without issue. I’m expecting the more complex nature of FOKS might make self-hosting in this way difficult. I’d rather minimize the dynamic services I expose to the outside publicly if I’m self hosting.

Define lack of design. You mean theming? because Linux has way more customizable theming options than the proprietary alternatives, to fit all kinds of subjective tastes.

You mean usability? it’s the one system that you can rice up to do absolutely whatever you want to do to fit your workflow, you can configure any key to automate literally anything a desktop can do.

The catch is that you actually do have to get your hands dirty if you want to mold the system to your liking… as opposed to being your own tastes the ones molding to adapt to whichever the designer of the OS decided should be the new tacky fashion or workflow.

But, whichever command I put in autostart.sh will run as if I run in terminal with the & sign. E.g: dunst & to run in the background.

Well, only if it’s one single command, if you have multiple commands inside of the script, they will still run sequentially (the next command will only run after the previous one completely closes) unless you add & to them as well.

The difference is that dwm itself will not have to wait for the autostart.sh to complete before launching itself (thanks to it being run in the background with &)

However, autostart_blocking.sh (which isn’t run with a &) will stop dwm from fully launching until the script completes… I guess this is useful if you need certain things to be set up before dwm actually starts… but it would potentially add a delay on dwm startup.

Another thing is that this standard does not allow setting an absolute size… you can only use fractions, for example, 2/3 of normal size, which can still be relatively big if your normal size is big.

I also expect making things bigger for emphasis (or adding headings) would likely be more common than making them smaller (that’s what I hope at least). Outside of things like mathematical notation where superscript/subscript might be useful (see this comment for some examples).

The problem with the web is that some websites use absolute units that might not scale well (like px) to define the sizes.

Just because it entered RC phase doesn’t mean it won’t take long to release. It’s not unlikely that a lot of bugs and problems could have been reported in the RC phase, specially for such a big changelog in a popular program that many people are likely to be interested to test during the RC phase.

To be honest, I expected it would take at least 4 months (specially given how it took them years to reach this far). I’m pleasantly surprised that it was this fast.

Yes… to be honest I feel old-school deathmatch arena shooters is the one genre where the FOSS world has actually already taken over what can be found in the proprietary world.

Most of the industry has moved on to some variation of hero-based abilities and/or some form of “mission” objective to try and add more tactical elements that essentially make it no longer the same play-style. Even the faster paced franchises like the modern Doom Eternal have given up on old-school deathmatch.

Phasmophobia & other multiplayer horror games of sorts (eg. ghost watchers, Labyrinthine, Pacify, devour, etc). I don’t think there’s any multiplayer horror game like any of those in the open source world.

I searched and I think there was at least one attempt at the idea (openphobia), but I don’t think it ever had a playable release before it was abandoned.

Bash. By default it might seem less featureful than zsh… but bash is a lot more powerful and extensible than some give it credit for. It might be more complex to set it up the way you like it, but once you do it, that configuration can be ported over wherever bash exists (ie. almost everywhere).

espeak default voice backend is synthesized without using actually real voice samples. So it doesn’t require downloading a huge package for each language, which is convenient in some cases, but the outcome is extremely robotic.

You can use MBROLA as backend for espeak so that it uses some voice samples and the result should be less jarring (it’d still be easy to tell it’s not natural voice, but at least you’d be able to understand it better). There’s a tutorial on this here: https://github.com/espeak-ng/espeak-ng/blob/master/docs/mbrola.md

Or you can try piper (https://github.com/rhasspy/piper) it’s one of the most natural-sounding TTS (here are some samples).

I think part of the reason why the long extension is often preferred is because it’s much clearer and it’s guaranteed to be supported and decompressed by the respective tools. Even when they don’t suppot tar archives, they’ll just give you the uncompressed tar in that case.

It’s also very common to do that with other extensions (not just .tar) when compressing big files. For example, when archiving logs they’ll often be stored as .log.gz, which makes it automatically clear that it’s a log file directly compressed with gzip and meant to be examined with tools like zcat and zless to view it.

And in cases like that you really need it to be clear on what data does the gzip stores, since it does not keep metadata about the file so you might not be able to get back the original name/extension of the file if you rename the gz file.