• 1. There is no universal definition what a technology needs to achieve in order to be “successful” or “failing”. Linux, in particular, depending on perspective, could have either “failed” literally all the time because it hasn’t (yet) achieved desktop dominance, or it could have been massively successful on the other hand because it has been dominant on servers and mobile phones (in the form of Android). Now if we look at desktop Linux in particular, it has also somehow “not failed” at the same time, because it has continued to grow. It was stagnant for a very, very long time at around 1% market share but recently it’s been steadily increasing up to about 5%. Again, depending on your definition or vibes, you could call this either successful or failing. Which is why these terms in isolation are kind of meaningless.
• 2. Microsoft is a company, Windows Phone was a product by that company. If a product from a company “fails”, the company will abandon that product. It’s that simple. Sure, gaining foothold against established iOS and Android is super hard. Which is the reason why Microsoft’s effort failed. But, they are just a company. Linux, on the other hand, is at its core a world-wide community-developed open source software project (as well as most of the software that runs on top of it) and so it doesn’t really matter if it grows up to Android or iOS size. It’s still being developed as long as people want to develop for it. There’s no single CEO looking at some statistics and calling to cut that project because it doesn’t serve his definition of success.
• 3. In general, any project that strives to eventually rival established software products within a market has a steep uphill battle. It’s the network effect. Developers develop for iOS and Android because 99% of the user base uses those two mobile OS. Only very few developers will be like “oh there’s this new thing currently at 1% market share, sure, let’s help it grow!”. This alone prevents lots of apps you’d like to see on mainline Linux based mobile OS to ever exist for it. So you need to fall back to some workarounds like Waydroid, to run Android apps on Linux in the meantime, while Linux on mobile continues to grow and continues to attract developer attention. This can take a long time! On top of that are anti-competitive and monopolistic strategies and tactics being used by Google and Apple to ensure they remain on top of the mobile OS food chain. One such example is Google’s so-called Play Integrity API, which is basically a form of DRM. Some app developers have been misled by Google’s marketing to believe that they should implement it to ensure that their app is running on a “secure” device or environment. What they fail to realize is that Google uses that to basically label every non-Google-sanctioned Android distribution (like Graphene or Calyx or Lineage or many others) or Android runtime environment (like Waydroid) as “insecure” or other negative terms, which then prevents the app from being run at all. Furthermore they plan to restrict “sideloading” which means they want every app to only be distributed via Google’s app repository. This means Google wants to exert a ton of control over the developers, the platform and every single app that runs on it. Developers are usually being lured into this via marketing tricks that this would much more secure than it was before or similar nonsense. What they fail to realize is that this also destroys flexibility and freedom for the users to choose what they want to install, and from where. On desktop PCs, you have had these freedoms for forever (even Windows(!) is much more open and neutral than iOS or Android are these days) - you obviously also should have these freedoms for your mobile OS because it’s also just a computer with an OS on it. It’s simply none of the business of the OS developer to tell the user which apps he should install and from where. OS and apps are completely different things from completely different developers. Choice is being limited significantly when Google centrally controls what apps are being distributed at all, there’s 1 company telling you which apps you can and can’t use. This is obviously bad and should NEVER happen, but many developers, users and other people confronted with this are easily lured into Google- and Apple-operated cages by fake security talk/marketing. That means they help establish Google’s and Apple’s monopoly on mobile OS. This, combined with the network effect for app developers, is why it will take lots of time and also not a commercial product (because no commercial product will have the amount of money or time to compete with Apple or Google) to rise up to these monopolies until a third viable option is on people’s radars. Linux, due to its open source nature, is the only project that CAN achieve this because it can’t fail. It can only grow. But we also need to ensure that at least Android remains a somewhat neutral and open platform. If Google becomes more like Apple controlling literally everything, it gets even harder for alternatives (and for Android users in general).

Linux phones are usable right now, but of course you have some limitations in practice… many apps aren’t available or you have to use workarounds. If you mostly use open source applications you could be fine though. Although it’s likely that you still need a secondary, small Android-based phone that you turn on just for those rare cases where you absolutely need a certain mobile app and it’s only available for Android. At least while Linux mobile OS usage is still low. It’s probably going to grow faster in the future, because those monopolistic companies usually enshittify their products and services at some point (Google is already well on it) and then regular Android/iOS users become so annoyed at what they’re using that they also open up more for alternatives. It’s basically what’s happening in the desktop OS space right now - Windows continues to become more user-hostile and annoying to use, and desktop Linux passively (as well as actively) becomes more popular as a result. At some point, these companies forget what made their products popular in the first place and are only operating in the mode of milking users for data and profits, because they don’t need to work hard anymore to improve the product - it’s already popular enough. At that point, regular users who normally don’t care about things like freedoms, privacy and ethics in the product they use will notice that things became worse and might switch simply because of inconveniences they didn’t have before.

Another very good option beside Linux-based mobile OS these days is GrapheneOS. It’s the best Android-based distribution you can have currently, nothing comes close (not going to elaborate here because long post is already long). But you still should be prepared for increasing hostility from Google towards unofficial Android distributions, and some apps which use the Play Integrity DRM to not work. If you encounter this, make sure to let the app developer(s) know. They need to realize that they are only serving Google’s interests with this, not their own.

At this point, being on this planet is a losing cause.

I strongly disagree that unpopular things are automatically a losing cause though. I use and do some unpopular things because it’s more ethical or more beneficial overall, but I’m not at all troubled with it. I just try to be a somewhat decent citizen where many others would just be like “lol I don’t care about any consequences, just give me the cheapest or most convenient option”. I’m not like that. And I think more people shouldn’t be. But, again, at this point… it’s definitely a losing battle. But I still do it because then I can tell myself that I at least tried to do the somewhat right thing. It’s kind of just to have a clean conscience, whereas some others are completely fine burning the world for their own short-term gain. That’s basically the difference.

The current tech/IT sector is heavily relying on and riding hype trains. It’s a bit like the fashion industry that way. But this AI hype so far has only been somewhat useful.

Current general LLMs are decent for prototyping or example output to jump-start you into the general direction of your destination, but their output always needs supervision and most often it needs fixing. If you apply unreliable and constantly changing AI to everything, and completely throw out humans, just because it’s cheaper, then you’ll get vastly inferior results. You probably get faster results, but the results will have tons of errors which introduces tons of extra problems you never had before. I can see AI fully replacing some jobs in some specific areas where errors don’t matter much. But that’s about it. For all other jobs or purposes, AI will be an extra tool, nothing more, nothing less.

AI has its uses within specific domains, when trained only on domain-specific and truthful data. You know, things like AlphaZero or AlphaGo. Or AIs revealing new methods not known before to reach the same goal. But these general AIs like ChatGPT which are trained on basically the whole web with all the crap in it… it’s never going to be truly great. And it’s also becoming worse over time, i.e. not improving much at all, because the web will be even fuller with AI-generated crap in the future. So the AIs slurp up all that crap too. The training data gets muddier over time. The promise of AIs getting even more powerful as time goes on is just a marketing lie. There’s most likely a saturation curve, and we’re most likely very close to the saturation already, where it won’t really get any better. You could already see this by comparing the jump from GPT-3 to GPT-4 (big) and then GPT-4 to GPT-5 (much smaller). Or take a look at FSD cars. Also not really happening, unless you like crashes. Of course, the companies want to keep the illusion rolling so they’ll always claim the next big revolution is just around the corner. Because they profit from investments and monthly paying customers, and as long as they can keep that illusion up and profit from that, they don’t even need to fulfill any more promises.

Two words which every internet-using person should know about because they tend to be forgotten: proportionality and sophistication.

Just because there is some element of crime within a specific group within a society, doesn’t mean that the solution is to completely exterminate the whole society.

This is what the word “extremism” means - if you’re an extremist you find extreme measures at least OK because you’ve stopped differentiating and thinking about proportions. And when doing extreme measures to a specific group of people (usually a minority group, or even a whole weaker country), then you’re right-wing extremist.

You wouldn’t want those things to be done to yourself when you’re part of a subgroup that’s under attack. You wouldn’t want to be a victim of extreme measures. That’s one reason why these extreme measures shouldn’t exist in the first place.

Why this is happening: right-wing extremist propaganda on popular proprietary social media, and random people believing it and radicalizing themselves. Of course it’s going to spawn more radicalized right-wing extremists, everywhere the propaganda machine turns its head towards (they managed to ruin USA, now they’re trying to ruin Europe). Normal people will become more radicalized in the process. It’s like a global cult and its propaganda distribution mechanism is the internet. Not everyone will have enough education or media literacy to resist this. China and Russia are the big benefactors of a divided and in-fighting West.

Collapse will definitely come. Our way of living on this planet is not sustainable, especially now where everyone who would have the power/influence to change things does literally and openly the opposite (e.g. USA turning their back on climate friendly research/technologies for example). So I think it’s kind of over, I’m kind of an optimist but time is simply running out, we had the Paris agreement and all that jazz like 10 years ago and almost nothing really changed (the only time something changed for the positive was during 2020/2021 but that was involuntarily!), in fact it’s now probably worse than it was back then, so it’s kind of over. Sure you can and should individually continue fighting for it because every small improvement will at least delay the collapse a bit which is useful, but I’m not going to naively believe that we will be able to counteract this anymore. It’s too little, too late. And that’s not even taking into account the possibility of a WW3. And rich/powerful people probably know this as well that the geological and political situations become increasingly unstable which is why they are building luxury bunkers. I would build one too, if I had the spare change.

1 (2012)

How to Wagon your Dragon

Soldier (Platoon)

Something quiet on the Western Contested Spot

Raindrop Man

Shaun of One Body

D.T. - The Default Terrestrial (E.T.)

Star War: Appearance of a Jed

Indiana Jones or the Only Crusader

One ring to rule one person.

1 Ronin

Plan 1 From Outer Space

Buena Vista Solitary Spot

Clover

One-dimensional Point 1: One-dimensional Point

District 1

Eye Narrowly Shut

Edward Scissorhand

Gremlin 1: The New Item

The Langolier

The One Grassleaf Mower Man

The Ending Chapter

Monty Python Or The Holy Grail

Planet of one ape

Policeman Student

A Tale of One Sole Sister

South Park: Small, Short & Cut

Joined

The Limbguard

By the way, ignoring as much of this big tech corpo crap as you can also makes you live an easier life.

Whenever I see a story of “some guy who relies on <big tech account> working loses access to it and suddenly can’t do anything anymore” I think “this can never happen to me”. Which means there’s a whole category of problems you’re suddenly never going to see. It also means you’re less naive. So just don’t vendor-lock yourself in. Don’t put a log-in for an account which you don’t control in front of important things you need to do. Simple as that.

On top of that, you’ll also leak less private data about yourself and probably others as well. So you even make yourself less of a target when it comes to data protection laws or something. I know, these get routinely ignored. I’m just saying, if you don’t even use the problematic stuff (or almost never), you’ll also have potentially less legal troubles at hand. And you never know, legel troubles might not appear for a while but they could lurk far in the future. For example, many Nazis got into legal trouble for their participation in Nazi Germany, even decades later.

I know, the guy from the story probably only needed that account to ensure he can compare some stuff with how MS Office is behaving compared to LibreOffice, or things like that. So it’s probably not a big deal. But generally speaking, you really shouldn’t vendor-lock yourself in.

The “Borat” actor (forgot the name)

That’s not so bad. The good news is that the game gets easier the farther you go. The endgame is the easiest part. The bad news is that you still need to know about a lot of the enemies, items and potential situations that can occur and how to handle them. The most important thing is to gather what’s commonly called an Ascension Kit, which is an approximate list of items you pretty much should have in order to win the game because then you can deal with literally every enemy and situation (unless you make a stupid mistake). So you need to know what those items are, how to get them, how to identify them in the game and not waste them, and things like that. You can get somewhat far just through sheer luck but you’ll never make it through if you play blindly (don’t read any tips or spoilers) or just rely on luck.

In Nethack, you can fully complete the game as a pacifist, although it’s VERY hard and the game is already hard to get into to begin with. In that case, you are only allowed to indirectly kill enemies by having your pet(s) kill them or by using spells which make enemies attack themselves. Or simply by avoiding enemies completely. Playing as a healer or wizard is the easiest option, but still very hard. The game rewards this and other conducts (= supported “challenges”) by mentioning it in the very end after you’ve ascended.

Translation help from Fascist English to US English:

• “activist” = a non-politician whose free speech we don’t like
• “allow all voices to be heard” / “free speech” = extremist/unconstitutional/propaganda speech which serves the interests of the current fascist regime must be allowed, while every other speech will be labelled as being activist/communist/un-American/…
• “defend […] all Americans” = at least the part of Americans which we tolerate or haven’t jailed yet (subject to change)

AI has some use but it always needs human oversight and the final decision must also be made by a human professional. If you use AI to speed up tasks and you know whether the output of the AI is valid or not, and you have the final decision, then you can safely use it. But if you let AI decide on and execute important tasks basically autonomously, then you have a recipe for disaster. Fully autonomous and mistake-free AI is a naive pipe dream which I don’t see on the horizon at all.

Generally yes but it’s not nearly always so clear cut that one is 100% the offender and the other one 0%. Which is why attention to details, context, sophistication, listening to both sides before coming to a conclusion, etc. Is so important. But guess what kind of things get lost when taking part in such a one-sided blame game on the semi-anonymous internet.

Apps like this but also social media more generally allow for one-sided public naming and shaming of Individuals who probably don’t even know about it. It’s problematic because it can be deeply unfair.

I get that there is also value in women protecting themselves against predators but more than likely most content within the app/service is probably one-sided public blaming and gossiping.

And as we all know from right-wing propaganda, being the first to make a bold claim public and generate headlines with it is very powerful and spreads the message far and wide, whether true or false, and many will just believe it’s true without further investigation.

Free: Battle for Wesnoth is really great, I haven’t played it in a long time but it was already great like 10-15 years ago so it’s probably even better today, Nethack (if you don’t mind the starting difficulty and the “graphics”) is also great, VERY complex gameplay but very rewarding if you know it fairly well. Also saw a video of Xonotic today, looks also really good if you’re into fast multiplayer arena shooters (Quake-like). Heard positive things about 0 AD as well (Age of Empires-like). All of these are open source and in the extra repository on Arch.

Non-free but really cheap: Stardew Valley is probably great, I’ve never played it and it doesn’t look like my cup of tea but I’ve only heard positive things plus it’s like #1 or #2 rated on Steam, so it must be really good.

Non-free: Stellaris (got into it recently, great game and well-maintained Linux client (not at all common), much better than I expected, VERY complex and content-rich, quite expensive when you want all DLCs. It’s like a live service game, you’ll pay quite a bit if you want everything, but you also get tons of content). Also, Alien Isolation is one of my favorite single player horror games of all time and it also has a Linux client (which was a surprise for me) but that one is probably outdated and not maintained anymore by now I’d guess (but didn’t look it up) so it might be better to play the Windows client via Proton. I’m not up to date on that though - look it up. Oh, and POOLS also has a Linux client, that’s a great small walking simulator, “Backrooms”-like, very atmospheric and great visual design.

While this is “nice”, I guess, I also can’t fathom how naive this generally seems.

X is a proprietary black box and X or L.Ron Musk can change the algorithm literally at will, what they show which persons and when and when not. There is NO time ever where users have have any control over it, and to perform a statistical analysis on an online service blackbox is also kind of pointless because the blackbox can change randomly, at any point in time, possibly right after the analysis has concluded, or right before. I mean it’s not like the blackbox is in your hands so that you can actually study inputs/outputs and get consistent results. Every time you visit any X URL, there’s potentially a fresh blackbox version deployed to you (you don’t know and you can’t know). That makes it rather pointless IMHO. And it’s just as pointless to believe what X claims about these issues. Of course they’ll always claim that they don’t manipulate. And you can never prove or disprove it, because of a complete lack of control over it from the user’s end. So they can do what they want, as long as they do it sneakily enough that no one notices.

For example if this study comes to the conclusion that there was no manipulation during the time of the study, that’s meaningless because it could have happened before and it could happen afterwards. If it comes to the conclusion that there was manipulation at a certain time, then X can always claim that they’ve already “fixed” the issue and then it’s again a new black box and no one knows when the next manipulation is being activated.

The ONLY solution to this is to ONLY use open source platforms where not a single company or host is able to do what they want with the complete service. Or in other words, the only solution is to avoid X and other proprietary social media platforms like the plague that they are. Because communication should not be controlled by any big company.

The only “wins” for this current US regime are negative records: most cruel, most degenerate, most stupid, most racist, and so on. And the “grand prize” for these wins will be war (civil or conventional) plus a spot in history among the worst people ever to destabilize and rule a country.

So unfortunately websites routinely and carelessly lie about basically everything related to data protection stuff. This already begins with the term “technically necessary cookies”. No cookie is truly technically necessary. What they usually mean by that is “we really really want to put this tracking cookie from our ad partners like Google into your browser, and we don’t care whether you want that or not so we just claim it’s technically necessary”. But even if you refuse a cookie prompt, often your choice isn’t respected at all and cookies are created regardless. In fact, many cookies are already created at the very beginning before you make any choice in any sort of cookie banner. Basically this whole ad/tracking industry is a complete mess and no one really cares and it’s just best to completely ignore what sites claim and use technical means to protect yourself at least a little bit because you cannot trust ANY site’s claims regarding that. Most of the time, even the phrase “we value your privacy” is already the very first and biggest lie. Don’t trust what websites claim. It’s pointless, and nothing happens when they violate their own rules or data protection laws anyway. Which they do almost all of the time anyway. This illegality is routine and almost omni-present. Cookies are also far from the only thing that sites can use to track you. They’re just the most well-known method, which is probably why we have these near-pointless laws requiring sites to put up near-pointless banners to annoy visitors with.

So as a user, you should just ignore any of that and completely rely on technical means to protect yourself from any or most kinds of shenanigans websites can do to you. Most privacy-respecting browsers have features that limit what sites are able to do with you, such as cookie isolation which prevents other sites from being able to read the contents of cookies belonging to other sites. Or more general, isolation of any website data, not just limited to cookies. But not every browser has these types of protection. If you use very common browsers like Chrome, Edge or Opera, then it’s likely that you have none of that because the developers of those browsers are companies which profit from the user being more easily trackable through the web.

So the easiest solution as a user is to use a privacy-respecting, well-pre-configured browser like Librewolf or Mullvad Browser, and use uBlock Origin as the only extension with several enabled filter lists. This alone makes you a much harder tracking target. And of course you can safely ignore or block any cookie notices, it doesn’t really matter what you select in them most of the time anyway. Although your IP address is still always a liability with ANY browser, because it can be fairly easily linked to your person and you will expose your IP address with any regular browser, so if you want to browse anonymously you should use the Tor Browser (with mostly default settings and no additional extensions). That means that you won’t have ad blocking protection, but at the same time the site and any ad servers don’t know who you are anyway (you’re just some random person from a random country for them), unless you make a mistake and log into a personally-identifiable account or so. The Tor Browser also contains the most amount of anti-tracking and anti-fingerprinting techniques possible. For casual anonymous browsing you should absolutely use the Tor Browser, because with it it’s highly unlikely that a website is able to identify you. Its main disadvantages are that it’s slower, some sites block that kind of browser, and since you shouldn’t add any other extensions you will see ads with it, but your identity still remains protected unless you make a mistake. Still, it should be your go-to browser for anonymous browsing. Switch to your regular browser for when you want to log in to an account with personal details.