halm

joined 11 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, that was my thinking — that for most purposes LibreOffice will replace Microsoft Office fairly well. But I'm always keen to hear what bumps people run into when they switch from the latter. For you it seems there haven't been any worth mentioning?

Glad to hear it's gone so smoothly!

[–] [email protected] 4 points 23 hours ago (3 children)

Welcome to the resistance! 😄

I did pretty much similar as you, but about a decade ago. Was it really Windows 8 at the time? 7 perhaps? Even then the OS was becoming increasingly bloated, and crudely implementing channels for Microsoft to milk data from users.

For me it wasn't so much editors and development environment that kept me around, but the Adobe suite — specifically the lack of CMYK support in FLOSS alternatives. In the end I was quite happy to just find workarounds for the few print jobs I would have to do.

Quite often I think people are less resisting a new OS environment than the software available. "I couldn't use the same shortcuts in [FLOSS package] as in [proprietary software], so I went back to Windows"...

I'm not exactly a hardcore Excel user myself, but I'd be interested to hear how your transition to LibreOffice (I guess the most viable alternative?) will work out.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 23 hours ago

I genuinely thought we were training Google's self driving car algorithm, like back when we were proof reading their illegally scanned books' OCR.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I hope the catch is that everyone who tries to install it from github gets ransomwared.

Bonus if it also rickrolls them all the while.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Yeah, this news cycle may not be the best for CUPS advocacy 😄

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I wholly disagree with everything you just said, including that your friends and family by your own assessment are unable to rise above average skills. But you know them better than I do, of course 🤷

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 days ago

Very meta, good work 😄

[–] [email protected] 9 points 4 days ago

Good discussions can arise from bad takes, and the idea of "failure" can often be an impediment — especially in a forum where users' yay or nay to a post literally decide its currency and ranking.

Assuming that the poster in this case deleted their post out of "shame" for a "failed idea", however, is a bit of an overreach without access to their thoughts and motivations. And trying to pass principles about what "we" should or shouldn't do on that basis is equally flimsy.

I do agree that deleting a post with several replies can be damaging to a discussion — emphasis on the potential, not the actual value of any given Lemmy conversation — but becoming the target for criticism or even ridicule for an ill-considered post isn't exactly pleasant either. And after a few decades online, I'm not faulting anybody for deleting one post or another, even though I probably don't understand the reasoning for doing so.

In the end, everybody is on here for different reasons, and all of them are valid. It would be nice to make a noble agreement about what "should" and "shouldn't" be done when you get massively downvoted, but if people want to curate their pseudonymous online presence to appear less daft than their worst — let 'em.

[–] [email protected] -5 points 4 days ago (3 children)

Oh sorry, did I deviate from current groupthink? At least I didn't cross the line into posting blackface.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 days ago

I've been eyeing Pico, but it doesn't seem to be super well maintained? Do you know if it's still active?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago) (8 children)

I'm starting to see a pattern in modern Trek here. We're used to seeing shows made by committee, but the rate that key creative people are being swapped out and their ideas corrupted as they're passed on is just disconcerting:

Alex Kurtzman, James Duff, and I believe maybe one other writer was involved at the time, and James really wanted it to be a Borg spin-off. […] But had Patrick not done it, some kind of show about the Borg would have happened. It would not have been Picard, it would have been a show about the Borg. […] And James left the show before they began filming. He had a creative differences and left, I think, weeks before I even began. I’d signed my contract, and the people that were left, I think, then made that decision [that Hugh was getting killed off] without my being told or even knowing about it through gossip.

Never mind that actors aren't told in advance what will happen to their characters, I get a feeling that writers make things up on the fly while actually shooting fairly serialised seasons. We see Bryan Fuller being removed from Disco while it's in preproduction, then Berg and Harberts being fired mid-season two.

As somebody who loved early Discovery and only hate watches the kitschy car crash of Strange new worlds, that sort of subtext gives me really bad vibes off the current Trek productions.

And who is left once the dust settles. Too often we see Akiva Goldsman getting pulled in to "save" shows and,for all his Academy Award winning "A beautiful mind" glory, he seems to mostly play fantasy football with Star Trek.

Goldsman's Star trek tributes were cutesy when he did them on Fringe, but now that he's a mover on the actual franchise, fucking up continuities of the TOS roster and every bit of canon about the Gorn? Not so much.

 

On my new phone I'm tempted to switch from LineageOS for microG to IodéOS, just for the ease of a dedicated installer. What are your experiences of pros and cons?

Bonus question, while I prefer full control of my phone, Iodé lists "uninstallable apps" as a feature(?) — what in the world are those?

Edited title for clarity

 

Since returning as show runner of Doctor Who, RTD has stated fairly confidently that he was going to make sure the show delivered one season per year going forward. That made the reduced episode count a bit easier to swallow... a tiny bit...

In the meantime, though, streaming companies have become more cautious splurging money on show commissions, and it seems that includes distributing deals like the Disney+ one that boosted Doctor Who budgets for the most recent season, as well the forthcoming, already filmed season.

Quoted from an interview with SFX magazine, RTD now says that we won't have a definitive answer about a third Ncuti Gatwa outing until season 2 has finished airing:

It’s an industry decision, it's like any business – these things take time. I think the decision will come after the transmission of season two. That's what we're expecting, that's what we've always been heading towards.

Given the time it seems to take only producing 8 episodes and a special these days, that will likely mean at least an extra one year gap between seasons 2 and 3 airing, if the show is even renewed by all current production and distribution parties.

Maybe, just maybe the spin-off The war between the land and the sea can fill in such a gap, but only time will tell.

 

I do appreciate that the Lemmy Doctor Who communities are less prone to wild fan speculation and continuity semantics rabbit holes, I really do. Sometimes, though, I dip back onto the main subreddits, and boy, do they get into massive circle jerks over little things that only jar others slightly.

Having exposed myself to the fandom mind virus, but refusing to join the fray on Reddit, I'll just infodump my own head canon explanations to (apparently controversial) occurrences in the latest season of the show here:

Is the Shalka Doctor now unredacted from continuity?

In the episode "Rogue", holograms of the Doctor's past selves loop around 15 like an old iTunes cover gallery. One of them is clearly Richard E Grant, who played ~~the~~ a ninth Doctor in "Scream of the Shalka". The animated series was short-lived and written out of the show's canon when the 2005 revival show introduced Eccleston as the "authoritative" ninth Doctor.

IRL explanation: Russell T Davies thought it would be fun to throw in Grant's face in the line-up. There's probably not more to it.

My in-universe explanation: The eighth Doctor actually regenerated into the Shalka Doctor, but because the Time War happened and rewrote timelines several times over, 8's eventually solidified upon the events of "Night of the Doctor", where he instead regenerates into the War Doctor.

However, time being relative, the Shalka Doctor is still extant if only as a wisp of an individual timeline, because a) he is a time traveler and therefore a complex temporal event not easily erased, and b) the Time War left the time stream in such a disarray that he may exist in a state of flux (no, not that one), and either continues adventuring as an offshoot of the Doctor's timeline, or is suspended in some kind of quantum field just slightly removed from it.

Pretty handwavy, yes, but all of Who continuity sort of requires you to gesture wildly like the eleventh Doctor having a thought, just for it to make some sort of sense.

The Doctor "was a dad", but 15 "hasn't had children yet"?!

In "The legend of Ruby Sunday", the fifteenth Doctor talks about his granddaughter Susan, who traveled with the first Doctor in the early years of the show. He then pivots to saying that he hasn't had children yet.

This is despite several if not all NuWho Doctors having referred in some form to having been a dad — including 15, just a few episodes earlier, in "Boom"! So which is it?

IRL explanation: As above, Russell T Davies likes to throw in non sequitur comments and details that mess with people's understanding of the show's lore. On a positivist note, it keeps that lore dynamic and throws some mysteries out for himself or subsequent writers to glom onto, like the Morbius Doctors or "half human on my mother's side" of the past. If it doesn't stick, ignore it.

My in-universe explanation: Ignoring the extended universe here, we don't know a lot about the Doctor's life previous to "An unearthly child", and nearly none about their family relations. What we do know is that they are a very prolific time traveler, and as witnessed from 11 and 12's relationship with River Song, things tend to get complicated, and invariably nonlinear.

With that in mind, it's perfectly feasible that 15 or a future incarnation has a child (the birds and bees part, or possibly looms?) that, for whatever reason, they leave for their previous, Hartnell self to raise (be a father to). Heck, given the above Shalka Doctor explanation, he could be the father, and 15 would be off the hook. Exactly what can we assume about a Time Lord's sense of self when alternative timelines come into play?

Along with the Doctor's realization that they are an "adopted" Timeless Child, as well as Ruby's search for her bio-mum in the past season, this explanation plays nicely into the twin notions of parenthood as giving life to a child versus raising it. Add to this that the Doctor's relationship to his companions (post-Susan) have always been stories of found and/or extended family.

It all makes sense when you (don't) think (too hard) about it!

So there you have it, the Doctor Who Reddit post to end all Doctor Who Reddit posts, deliberately not posted to Reddit. The important TL;DR is, time is in flux, several things can be true at the same time, and don't break your mind thinking about a TV show.

Anything else that needs explaining?

[Edited to get rid of the quotation formatting]

 

cross-posted from: https://leminal.space/post/9913175

I do appreciate that the Lemmy Doctor Who communities are less prone to wild fan speculation and continuity semantics rabbit holes, I really do. Sometimes, though, I dip back onto the main subreddits, and boy, do they get into massive circle jerks over little things that only jar others slightly.

Having exposed myself to the fandom mind virus, but refusing to join the fray on Reddit, I'll just infodump my own head canon explanations to (apparently controversial) occurrences in the latest season of the show here:

Is the Shalka Doctor now unredacted from continuity?

In the episode "Rogue", holograms of the Doctor's past selves loop around 15 like an old iTunes cover gallery. One of them is clearly Richard E Grant, who played ~~the~~ a ninth Doctor in "Scream of the Shalka". The animated series was short-lived and written out of the show's canon when the 2005 revival show introduced Eccleston as the "authoritative" ninth Doctor.

IRL explanation: Russell T Davies thought it would be fun to throw in Grant's face in the line-up. There's probably not more to it.

My in-universe explanation: The eighth Doctor actually regenerated into the Shalka Doctor, but because the Time War happened and rewrote timelines several times over, 8's eventually solidified upon the events of "Night of the Doctor", where he instead regenerates into the War Doctor.

However, time being relative, the Shalka Doctor is still extant if only as a wisp of an individual timeline, because a) he is a time traveler and therefore a complex temporal event not easily erased, and b) the Time War left the time stream in such a disarray that he may exist in a state of flux (no, not that one), and either continues adventuring as an offshoot of the Doctor's timeline, or is suspended in some kind of quantum field just slightly removed from it.

Pretty handwavy, yes, but all of Who continuity sort of requires you to gesture wildly like the eleventh Doctor having a thought, just for it to make some sort of sense.

The Doctor "was a dad", but 15 "hasn't had children yet"?!

In "The legend of Ruby Sunday", the fifteenth Doctor talks about his granddaughter Susan, who traveled with the first Doctor in the early years of the show. He then pivots to saying that he hasn't had children yet.

This is despite several if not all NuWho Doctors having referred in some form to having been a dad — including 15, just a few episodes earlier, in "Boom"! So which is it?

IRL explanation: As above, Russell T Davies likes to throw in non sequitur comments and details that mess with people's understanding of the show's lore. On a positivist note, it keeps that lore dynamic and throws some mysteries out for himself or subsequent writers to glom onto, like the Morbius Doctors or "half human on my mother's side" of the past. If it doesn't stick, ignore it.

My in-universe explanation: Ignoring the extended universe here, we don't know a lot about the Doctor's life previous to "An unearthly child", and nearly none about their family relations. What we do know is that they are a very prolific time traveler, and as witnessed from 11 and 12's relationship with River Song, things tend to get complicated, and invariably nonlinear.

With that in mind, it's perfectly feasible that 15 or a future incarnation has a child (the birds and bees part, or possibly looms?) that, for whatever reason, they leave for their previous, Hartnell self to raise (be a father to). Heck, given the above Shalka Doctor explanation, he could be the father, and 15 would be off the hook. Exactly what can we assume about a Time Lord's sense of self when alternative timelines come into play?

Along with the Doctor's realization that they are an "adopted" Timeless Child, as well as Ruby's search for her bio-mum in the past season, this explanation plays nicely into the twin notions of parenthood as giving life to a child versus raising it. Add to this that the Doctor's relationship to his companions (post-Susan) have always been stories of found and/or extended family.

It all makes sense when you (don't) think (too hard) about it!

So there you have it, the Doctor Who Reddit post to end all Doctor Who Reddit posts, deliberately not posted to Reddit. The important TL;DR is, time is in flux, several things can be true at the same time, and don't break your mind thinking about a TV show.

Anything else that needs explaining?

[Edited to get rid of the quotation formatting]

 

I do appreciate that the Lemmy Doctor Who communities are less prone to wild fan speculation and continuity semantics rabbit holes, I really do. Sometimes, though, I dip back onto the main subreddits, and boy, do they get into massive circle jerks over little things that only jar others slightly.

Having exposed myself to the fandom mind virus, but refusing to join the fray on Reddit, I'll just infodump my own head canon explanations to (apparently controversial) occurrences in the latest season of the show here:

Is the Shalka Doctor now unredacted from continuity?

In the episode "Rogue", holograms of the Doctor's past selves loop around 15 like an old iTunes cover gallery. One of them is clearly Richard E Grant, who played ~~the~~ a ninth Doctor in "Scream of the Shalka". The animated series was short-lived and written out of the show's canon when the 2005 revival show introduced Eccleston as the "authoritative" ninth Doctor.

IRL explanation: Russell T Davies thought it would be fun to throw in Grant's face in the line-up. There's probably not more to it.

My in-universe explanation: The eighth Doctor actually regenerated into the Shalka Doctor, but because the Time War happened and rewrote timelines several times over, 8's eventually solidified upon the events of "Night of the Doctor", where he instead regenerates into the War Doctor.

However, time being relative, the Shalka Doctor is still extant if only as a wisp of an individual timeline, because a) he is a time traveler and therefore a complex temporal event not easily erased, and b) the Time War left the time stream in such a disarray that he may exist in a state of flux (no, not that one), and either continues adventuring as an offshoot of the Doctor's timeline, or is suspended in some kind of quantum field just slightly removed from it.

Pretty handwavy, yes, but all of Who continuity sort of requires you to gesture wildly like the eleventh Doctor having a thought, just for it to make some sort of sense.

The Doctor "was a dad", but 15 "hasn't had children yet"?!

In "The legend of Ruby Sunday", the fifteenth Doctor talks about his granddaughter Susan, who traveled with the first Doctor in the early years of the show. He then pivots to saying that he hasn't had children yet.

This is despite several if not all NuWho Doctors having referred in some form to having been a dad — including 15, just a few episodes earlier, in "Boom"! So which is it?

IRL explanation: As above, Russell T Davies likes to throw in non sequitur comments and details that mess with people's understanding of the show's lore. On a positivist note, it keeps that lore dynamic and throws some mysteries out for himself or subsequent writers to glom onto, like the Morbius Doctors or "half human on my mother's side" of the past. If it doesn't stick, ignore it.

My in-universe explanation: Ignoring the extended universe here, we don't know a lot about the Doctor's life previous to "An unearthly child", and nearly none about their family relations. What we do know is that they are a very prolific time traveler, and as witnessed from 11 and 12's relationship with River Song, things tend to get complicated, and invariably nonlinear.

With that in mind, it's perfectly feasible that 15 or a future incarnation has a child (the birds and bees part, or possibly looms?) that, for whatever reason, they leave for their previous, Hartnell self to raise (be a father to). Heck, given the above Shalka Doctor explanation, he could be the father, and 15 would be off the hook. Exactly what can we assume about a Time Lord's sense of self when alternative timelines come into play?

Along with the Doctor's realization that they are an "adopted" Timeless Child, as well as Ruby's search for her bio-mum in the past season, this explanation plays nicely into the twin notions of parenthood as giving life to a child versus raising it. Add to this that the Doctor's relationship to his companions (post-Susan) have always been stories of found and/or extended family.

It all makes sense when you (don't) think (too hard) about it!

So there you have it, the Doctor Who Reddit post to end all Doctor Who Reddit posts, deliberately not posted to Reddit. The important TL;DR is, time is in flux, several things can be true at the same time, and don't break your mind thinking about a TV show.

Anything else that needs explaining?

54
TGx down? (leminal.space)
submitted 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
 

https://torrentgalaxy.to

I don't want to jump the gun here, they had outages for maintenance recently that were misconstrued as a possible takedown. After Fmovies went down I guess I'm just a little antsy.

Joke's on me if the site is up again minutes after I press "send" 😬

Update: TorrentFreak picked up on the outage as well

 

Ruth Madeley is now confirmed to be reprising her role as UNIT's scientific advisor Shirley Anne Bingham in the spin-off.

Though fans might have anticipated Shirley's appearance in The War Between The Land And The Sea, the second new cast member is rather more surprising...

Colin McFarlane will also appear in the series as General Austin Pierce, a role he last played in the 2009 miniseries Torchwood: Children of Earth – 15 years ago.

Good to see Madeley back on screen! Her replacement in the recent season by Lenny Rush did give us another memorable UNIT character, but I'm looking forward to see more of Shirley.

Now, my memory of "Children of Earth" is a bit rusty, but iirc General Pierce will probably be wary of invaders from another world after that experience... We can hope that is the reasoning for his inclusion in this storyline?

 

co-creator Alexander Woo told The Hollywood Reporter: "There was another sequence that was really fun and played really well and would have been a fantastic cameo appearance for an actor that I don’t want to name —because I don’t want to make someone feel bad for being cut out of the show.

"However, it is a former Doctor Who, I’ll say that much. Fans of that would probably would have found it delightful. But for the sake of the rest of the episode, we had to set it aside."

DB Weiss joked: "Jon Pertwee – 124 years old and still showed up."

Leave it to the former GoT showrunners to casually axe a high profile cameo. Apparently even their cutting room floor is like a Red Wedding.

So we'll never know which surviving Doctor didn't make the final edit, but speculation is fun, and free. Go nuts in the comments 🙂

 

Probably a hot take for everybody who just wants a drop-in replacement for Reddit, but I think a new platform needs to take the opportunity to improve over what's gone before.

So what I'm proposing is a more granular approach to curating one's feed on an individual user level, much like both Mastodon and apps for that platform offer (I'm going to use Tusky as an example because I've used that for a while and know its features fairly well).

Imagine a filter list where you could block specific terms, source URLs or other. No more irrelevant mentions of whatever annoys the hell out of you when you open /all. Along with your individual block list, limited as that is, it would help you as a user to home in on what matters to you.

Might this create filter bubbles? Yes, but if it's implemented on a per user level it won't affect other users' feeds. The "bubble" is a one-person act. In my experience /all on both Reddit and Lemmy suffers from people trying to curate it to their personal liking with downvotes, which just creates a monoculture.

Personally, I think free text filters would help solve that problem, and might aid users in engaging with their preferred communities. Suggestions, ideas?

 

Davies addressed the fan theory that Mrs Flood is former companion Romana as she was wearing a similar costume - and he didn't quite rule it out.

[…] "Probably because she’s wearing white fur, people are going to think she’s [Time Lord companion] Romana, aren’t they?"

Davies added: "I promise you answers to that. […]"

 

...being on Disney Plus now, this is a very deliberate choice to bring back an old BBC enemy – we've even cast the same actor [Gabriel Woolf] – to prove that the show hasn't severed its roots. To delve into your backstory is a very fine thing. That's thrilling for new viewers, and for old viewers it's a great reward.

Also, you're guaranteed that the internet will do your work for you. In the old days, you could feasibly have said, 'Will people know who Sutekh is?' Now, it's on our official site. It's on our Instagram posts. Type in the word 'Sutekh' and there's an entire Wikipedia article, full of the history.

 

cross-posted from: https://leminal.space/post/8396158

I've used LineageOS with microG on my Oneplus 6 for years — so happily, in fact, that I haven't bothered with major updates since version 17 (Android 10). Oops!

Now I've been flashing updates to an older phone, and I might as well continue getting my daily driver up to date. I'm going to dirty flash my way up to the current version (21). But I'm rusty as all heck, and the upgrade instructions seem to have changed since last:

  1. Back in '21 I recall being recommended to disable screenlock (fingerprint/PIN/pattern, etc) before upgrading. Is that still a thing?
  2. With a/b slot devices it used to be necessary to flash ROMs twice or use a copy-partitions or simiilar zip file. The instructions make no mention of it, is that rolled into the upgrade package now?
  3. Finally, is it safe to just upgrade directly from LOS/mG v18 to v21? Because neither LOS main or the mG branch seem to archive older versions but I'd hate to miss some system update or other.

All help is appreciated!

Edited for clarity: Please don't offer suggestions on "better" phones or OSes — my question regards the above only. Thanks in advance 👍

view more: next ›