Any CPU under 100 will take forever to install Gentoo, plus if 100MB is an issue Gentoo will not work for you either. Also you don’t need 1TB, and 1TB HDDs are way cheaper if you’re that tight for space. I have systems with less than 100GB dedicated to the OS and they run great, so you can get a $30 SSD and not worry about disk space for your system ever again.

It’s easy but at the same time your system is always broke? Either you were lying there or are now.

Btw. You can choose what bloat you want to have in your system (only DE vor goodies too)

Precisely my point, you keep mentioning Arch as being Bloat free and complaining that Fedora or others are bloated.

Why do you think Mint/Ubuntu/Fedora/Bazzite are not that though? It seems you don’t know how to ask your system to do stuff because otherwise your Arch install wouldn’t break. Plus I bet that the default installation of any of those distros occupies around the same disk space than what you have now.

Honestly you read like an angsty teen who read Arch is advanced and wants to be 1337 by using it, a few years back you would have been using Kali. Let me tell you a secret, Arch is not advanced, it’s a very easy straightforward distro, it just starts from a mostly clean slate, but if you’re using gnome/kde/cinnamon or any DE that distros come prepacked with its just as bloated with extra steps.

Bluetooth is a fucking security risk, wifi too.

Sure pal, big security risks. You should learn about cyber security before regurgitating information. Having the chip is not a security risk, having the open source driver isn’t either, the security risk is 99% between the screen and the chair.

I dont care how bloated your os is. Also BLAOT IS WHY IM SWITCHING

My point is that Arch is not inherently unbloated, any distro can be bloated, any distro can be unbloated, you decide what’s bloat and what’s not.

Do you know about limited disk space? Cuz that doesnt seem to be a problem for you, maybe it is for tho? Who knows?

We’re talking less than 100MB here, if your disk space is that limited you should really consider upgrading. Especially if you’re going to try Gentoo, because not only it requires more disk space but if you can’t afford a cheap 1TB drive chances are your CPU will take a week to install Gentoo since you need to compile everything.

Because they occupy so small disk size that they don’t matter and it’s easier to have it and not need it than need it and not have it. I wouldn’t call hardware support bloat ware.

Also, just so you know, Arch has Bluetooth and wifi compatibility even if you don’t install the packages, Gentoo does not. You would need to recompile your kernel with the correct configuration to enable those for your specific card.

Arch is just as bloated as Fedora, Mint or Bazzite. Hell, my Arch is a lot more bloated than any of those. This is Linux, the system is as bloated as you want it to be, but also having stuff installed doesn’t necessarily causes your computer to be slow, programs only execute when you tell them to.

I’m sorry for being blunt, but Arch is very easy and plug-and-play like, if you’re having these sorts of issues my guess is that you’re not familiar with Linux and are doing stuff “wrong” (e.g. installing drivers from a website). Gentoo is a LOT more complicated and will hold your hand a lot less than Arch, I recommend you try something more beginning friendly like Mint, Fedora or Bazzite, learn the basics, learn the “Linux way” of doing stuff, then try Arch again, then, when you have a better reason than because I broke it, you can try Gentoo.

This is not a “you’re too dumb to do it” answer, but imagine someone who’s having issues driving a shift stick car asking how it’s like to rebuild the engine. You’re capable of rebuilding the engine yourself, you’re able to use Gentoo, just not now, learn to walk before you try to bungee jump.

Yeah, I was talking about the community in the last paragraph. The tool makes easier official ports and also allows unofficial ones (which works as an encouragement to studios to make the port official).

You’re completely missing the point of this. Oculus Quest uses an Android OS, which means every VR game released for Oculus Quest is an APK, which means there’s a version of the game already optimized for a portable VR headset that can be run with Waydroid/Lepton. Valve is making the same move they did with the Deck, we can’t convince studios to build native? Okay, we’ll run whatever version it is they have already published.

This in conjunction with Fex makes it so that they should be able to run any VR game that could possibly be run in the limited hardware, and they’re giving studios a way to release a “native” version that they already have laying around for better performance (or even to make their first release on Steam).

And let’s not forget side-loading, most games on the Quest have already leaked their APK, they don’t care too much because they’re the only Android portable VR, but because the frame is an open platform people would be able to just install those files manually very easily. So if the studios won’t do the minimal effort to bring their games to the frame the community will. I was momentarily sad when I realized that robo recall (which I own for the Oculus Quest) is not available on Steam, less sad now.

Can you name any other time someone sold hardware with an open platform at a loss?

Yeah, because business can’t simply ask employees or random people to buy the machines, rebuy from them and still get them cheaper. Hell, they can even advertise they will be buying machines for 10% higher price and let random people offer it to them. It’s an open platform, you can’t prevent people from getting it. Selling the machines at a loss is a sure way to have Valve bleed money, just like it happened with the PlayStation 3 until they closed the system. I would rather the hardware costs a bit more so that the platform can remain open.

Re-read my answer, if they were sold at a loss like you suggested it would be beneficial for companies to purchase them to be office, servers or anything, costing Valve money without bringing them any profit afterwards because those machines would be purchased without gaming in mind, only because they were the cheapest available option (since all of the others have some profit margin and steam machines would be sold at a loss).

Yes, but my whole point was that PCs have other uses, so Valve selling a PC at a loss can’t recover the money with games because people won’t necessarily play games on that machine. Saying “if you’re playing games” to that point is like someone explaining to you why seatbelts are needed in cars and you replying with “if you never crash they’re useless”, like OF COURSE that if we enter your hypothetical example everything works, the whole point is about the disaster that would happen if that wasn’t the case.

So? PCs have other uses outside gaming, you know?

I don’t remember, probably not last time, but I remember doing some patching in the past.

It’s not in the thread line I’m replying to, to get to that I would have had to read another reply, and all of the replies to that to spot yours.

If the work you do can be fully specified in a Jira ticket, you’re a code monkey and not a software engineer, of course you can use LLMs to do your job since you can be replaced by an LLM.

And it’s not true that agents can’t help with edge cases, they can. If you know which points to look at, you task to analyze the specific interaction and watch which parts of the code would be mentioned.

You’re missing my point entirely, it’s not that it can’t help with, it’s that the solution it writes will not take them into account unless you tell it to, and to explain every edge case in enough details to be unambiguous about all of them is essentially the same as writing code directly. Not to mention that you can’t possibly know all of the edge cases of the solution it will write without seeing it, so you can’t directly tell it to watch for edge cases without knowing what code it will write.

I do write way less amount of symbols to LLM than I would when I write code.

Maybe, but then you have to review everything it wrote so you waste more time. Give me one concrete example of something that you can prompt an LLM to give you code that is advanced enough to be worth it (i.e. writing the prompt and reviewing the code it wrote would be faster than writing the code myself) and not generic enough that I would be able to find the answer in stack overflow.

Those symbols don’t have to be structured

If you don’t structure them the LLM might misinterpret what you meant. Structure in a language is required to make things unambiguous, this reminds me of the stupid joke of “go to the store and bring 1L of milk, if they have eggs bring 6” and the programmer coming back with 6L of milk because they had eggs. Of course that’s a stupid example, but anything complex enough to be worth using an LLM would be hard to describe unambiguously and covering all edge cases in normal human speak.

and they can even have typos, so I can focus my brain activity on things that actually matter.

Typos are very easy to correct, most editors will highlight them for you, and some can even autocorrect them but more likely you avoid most of them by using tab completion anyways. I don’t waste any brain activity on that, I’m thinking on the solution and structuring it in an unambiguous way, that is what writing code is, it’s not some cryptic art of writing the proper runes to make the machine do your will like you seem to be implying, it’s just structured thought.

Plus, copilot is shit.

Might be, wouldn’t know any other as that’s the one I have available to use, but sincerely I doubt others are that much better to make a difference.

I rate your post as a skill issue.

Yup, I have absolutely no skill in using LLMs, nor will I waste my time with it. Don’t get me wrong, it’s a neat tool for auto completing small snippets like we used to do with an actual snippet library a couple of years ago, it is also a decent tool to navigate unknown code bases asking it where certain parts are or how to achieve something in the. I would say that 60% of the time it gives you some good pointers, but 90% of the time most of the code it writes is wrong, but at least it points you in the right direction of where to start investigating.

I don’t expect you to understand this since from what I’m reading here you probably never worked on anything big enough, but a software engineer job is not to write code, that’s just a side-effect, our job is to solve problems, so either you’re trying to get the LLM to solve the problem for you, or wasting lots of time explaining your solution in English, reading the generated code, understanding it, analyzing it, fixing any issues and testing it, possibly multiple times instead of explaining your solution once in code and testing it.

To be fair, the first part of the game is by far the best. The unofficial patch adds back in a heckton of content in the late game, but even then, it feels sparse.

Maybe, I don’t know how far into the game I got since I never finished it. But I don’t think it ever felt empty… Although the damn zombie mission is one I hate and has made me quit the game in more than one occasion.

I’m running Linux now

I have been running Linux only for over a decade, so I can confidently say the game runs, and in Steam is just hit play.

Not replying to you but to that statement, they’re absolutely wrong. I’ve never finished Bloodlines, life keeps getting in my way and I keep losing my save file (this is not unique to Bloodlines, there are several other games that are in the same bag). My point is every few years I start a new save on the OG bloodlines, and that game still holds out great, sure graphics are outdated, but other than that it’s a great game even by today standards, and while I haven’t played bloodlines 2, I’m fairly confident from everything I’ve seen it’s a worse game by every metric that matters. These people think that graphics can overcome anything, but that’s one of the least important parts of the game.

Sorry, I won’t go through your post history to reply to a comment, be clearer on the stuff you write.

I’m a software engineer, and if that’s how you code you’re either wasting time or producing garbage code, which might be acceptable wherever you work, but I guarantee you that you would not pass code reviews where I do. I do use copilot, and it’s good at suggesting small snippets, maybe an if, maybe a function header, but even then 60% of the time I need to change what it suggested. Reviewing code is harder than writing it yourself, even if I could trust that the LLM would do exactly what I asked (which I can’t, not by a long shot) it would maybe be opened to bugs or special cases that I would have to read the code, understand what it tried to do, figure out edge cases on that solution and see if it handled them. In short, it would take me much longer to do stuff via LLMs than writing them myself, because writing code is the easy part of programming, thinking on the solution and it’s limitations and edge cases is the hard part, and LLMs can’t understand that. The moment you describe your solution in sufficient detail that an LLM can possibly generate the right code, you’ve essentially written the code yourself just in a more complicated and ambiguous format, this is what most non technical managers fail to understand, code is just structured English, we’re already writing something better than prompts to an LLM.

This is what you said:

Tbf AI tag should be about AI-generated assets. Cause there is no problem in keeping code quality while using AI, and that’s what the whole dev industry do now.

At no point did you mention someone approving it.

Also, you should read what I said, I said most large stuff generated by AI needs to be completely redone. You can generate a small function or maybe a small piece of an image, if you have a professional validating that small chunk, but if you think you can generate an entire program or image with LLMs you’re delusional.

No, the issue with “AI” is thinking that it’s able to make anything production ready, be it art, code or dialog.

I do believe that LLMs have lots of great applications in a game pipeline, things like placeholders and copilot for small snippets work great, but if you think that anything that an LLM produces is production ready and you don’t need a professional to look at it and redo it (because that’s usually easier than fixing the mistakes) you’re simply out of touch with reality.