I'm happy with 1080p content. I have a 4k TV and from the couch I can't see a difference. I would be perfectly happy with a bargain 4k TV, bigger the better.
I don't know how I've lived this far into my life without using a random year generator. So often, I want to think of a random year yet the thought exercise is too encumbering.
It is shitty in many ways. First, I view videogames as art (because they are art) and taking out the human element just makes them a product created by a machine. Coding is a form of human expression. I understand the capitalist urge not to pay people, but replacing people with AI is a moral wrong. Microsoft, for example, after purchasing many studios over the past few years, has fired over 15,000 people in 2025 alone, despite making record profits and charging us more for new games.
I would be terrified if I were a full-time coder. Like many other occupations, programming jobs are in jeopardy. I would be considering other fields or specializations because these corporations plan to replace them all. Google already is saying that more 25% of their code is written by ai. That will only increase and bleed over to game development.
Second, by forcing the development timeline by basically any means necessary, you are creating an inferior product. Just throwing a game in early access because it isn't complete isn't a good solution and there are hundreds of games currently in that status. Personally, I avoid anything that is early access, with a few exceptions. I get the point in the article about making games with lesser graphics, which I am fine with if the project warrants it, but it feels like these companies don't care what the product is as long as it sells. They are going to create ai-slop and charge us more for it. This is how the AAA industry dies.
It is because NYT is a mouth piece of the capitalist state. They protect their own. Proof of corruption by a sitting mayor is not as scary to them as a socialist who could become mayor.
What you are experiencing is called a learning curve. Don't let it get you angry, learn from it. NVIDIA is known to be problematic for Linux users (I have had my share of issues with my 2080 Ti) but once it is setup it is problem free. Librewolf is known to be one of the chunkier options, but 3gb really isn't that much for modern systems (especially if you have 16 or 32gb of memory). I would personally take Librewolf's privacy features over closed-source Vivaldi any day. Linux overall is much more efficient than Windows and I would bet that your system idle memory usage with nothing open is lower than it was with Windows.
That is an older laptop. I run an even older HP laptop on Arch that still feels zippy, even compared to my gaming desktop pc. One thing to remember is POP_OS! is designed for newer computers as it is built by a company who sells them. There are known issues with POP_OS! and Mesa drivers. The Mesa driver might not be efficiently handling the graphical demands of the default POP_OS! desktop. I'm not suggesting to switch your distro, just keep in mind going forward that it is made for newer systems.
Some further troubleshooting you can try:
Check for Driver Updates: Ensure the system is fully up-to-date by running sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade in the terminal .
Use a system monitor tool like htop, btop or the built-in system monitor to see if the CPU or RAM is maxing out when opening a program.
Check for Overheating: Check if the laptop feels unusually warm. This could indicate a need to clean the cooling vents and fan.
Welcome to the GNU/Linux family! Your desktop setup is lovely! I highly approve of the use of Librewolf. Pop_OS! is a great choice choice for a new GNU/Linux user. As for your system feeling slower, you might be missing something. Can you share some of the basic specs, like cpu/ram and/or brand/model of the laptop? What feels slow, the internet or the actual loading/power of the system?
I understand that you think socialism is fundamentally flawed, I can tell from your tone. I am attempting to engage you politely despite your previous mischaracterizations of what I have said.
I would like to present some counterexamples. Countries like Norway, Sweden, and Denmark have implemented socialist policies such as universal healthcare, free education, and a strong social safety net, and they've seen significant economic growth and social progress as a result.
In addition, the cooperative movement in countries like Spain and Italy has shown that worker-owned cooperatives can be highly successful and provide better working conditions and benefits for employees. And let's not forget about the Nordic model of socialism, which combines elements of market economics with strong social welfare policies to create a more equitable society.
But even within my own country (US), we've seen that periods of prosperity have often coincided with the implementation of social safety nets like Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and SNAP. These programs have helped to reduce poverty and inequality, and they've also contributed to economic growth by putting money in people's pockets and stimulating demand.
Furthermore, many of the worker protections we take for granted today were implemented after the Great Depression, as a response to the failures of laissez-faire capitalism and the exploitation of workers. The Fair Labor Standards Act, the National Labor Relations Act, and other key laws that safeguard workers' rights were all enacted during this period.
It seems to me that socialism is not inherently flawed but rather it has been distorted or watered down in some cases, or implemented in ways that don't prioritize the needs of working-class people.
I'm not buying your strawman argument. I don't appreciate your mischaracterizations. What I said was that many people are selfish and act in their own interest. However, I believe most people are inherently good and are often victims of their environment. That's why I support socialism - it is a system that aims to address the root causes of inequality and promote the common good.
Yes, there's some truth to that. If someone with vast resources wanted to end world hunger today, they could make a significant impact. But let's be real, people tend to prioritize their own interests and comfort over the greater good.
That's a classic strawman argument. Just because someone supports socialism doesn't mean they're motivated by personal gain or a desire to take from the wealthy. It means they care about creating a more equitable society for all.
That's not true. Supporting socialism has nothing to do with one's financial situation, but rather about advocating for a more equitable society where everyone has access to basic needs.
I'm happy with 1080p content. I have a 4k TV and from the couch I can't see a difference. I would be perfectly happy with a bargain 4k TV, bigger the better.