For all of GNOME's faults, it's provided me a much better experience than other DE's. XFCE and others don't handle fractional scaling nearly as gracefully as GNOME does. KDE is probably the closest but you still have the issue of running GTK/QT apps and they all look very different and jarring on the desktop.
The article makes it seem worse than it really is. All they seem to be doing is moving that functionality from being the default to an option that you enable.
Personally I heavily rely on the middle click to paste, especially with my docker workflows. Rather than having to click "CTRL+SHIFT+C" then "CTRL+SHIFT+V" every time, I just know whatever is highlighted will get pasted when I hit the middle click button. It's a subtle difference that saves maybe 1-2 seconds but combine that over the course of months and all of a sudden I've saved myself an hour with more efficient copy/paste.
Well, the source article is from El Reg, where objectivity is something to eventually strive for, but if it gets in the way of clicks, facts are definitely not a friend.
And, somehow, that strategy seems to keep working decade after decade. Yeah, I don't get it either...
After I’d been in the firing line for a couple of Reg articles I started realising that yes, they don’t let much stand in the way of a good story. They still write a good story though, it’s just slightly more tenuously tethered to reality than I’d originally imagined.
At least you know what you're getting with El Reg, unlike Very Serious Publications written for Very Serious People. The average article in CIO is also densely-packed bullshit, just polished up more.
Not a "normal" option though. They plan to hide it away inside `gsettings` so only power user who already knows about middle-click paste will be able to find it and enable it. This completely destroys discoverability.
I use both because they use to different software registries to store the information. This allows the CTRL+C content to be different than the middle mouse highlight.
I cannot stand the Windows middle mouse user experience and always prefer the middle highlight and paste method.
I find having two clipboards at the same time to be super handy and I literally use it all the time. Yes, KDE also has a clipboard manager that allows me to do Meta+V and paste from history, but I use the two clipboards way more frequently and it is easier/faster to, anyway.
(Formally, it makes handwavy sense: Having a clipboard with a history is basically a pushdown automaton, but having two of these in one box is not a PDA any more - it's something categorically more powerful, equivalent to a turing machine iirc).
Gnome options have a habit of disappearing. I've followed the project from its conception to the current iteration, used v1 and v2 interchangeably with KDE and eventually moved to Xmonad with whatever applications I need. Gnome 1 was hackish and geeky, Gnome 2 polished off the hackishness and turned an ugly but promising duckling into a fully-functional duck. Then came v3 and with that the opinionated paring-down of options started for real. It became almost obligatory to install one or more 'gnome tweaks' tools to make things work as they used to. Strangely enough this quest for 'simplicity' has forced many Gnome users to (re)turn to hackish tools like gnome-tweaks to make their computers works like they want as opposed to the way the Gnome team insists they should work.
Sure. But it's a depreciation and there's numerous similar settings that are only available by tweaking settings manually or using gnome-tweaks. Right now nearly every linux app supports select with the left button and paste with the middle. It's fast, useful, doesn't require a keyboard, etc. Amusingly I've seen various logins block control-v, but middle click works. God forbid you use a password safe with your bank login.
When you use gnome-tweaks there's a ton of "WARNING you may break things" and of course anything off the default path is likely to receive zero testing.
Personally I find middle click to paste one of the differentiators between MacOS, Windows, and Linux. I'm pretty surprised it's not more common. I was amused the iterm2 added select without having to type control-c.
Are you sure? Have you actually timed this, or are you just using your subjective impression of time.
In Human factors engineering we have known for decades that some things that seem faster are really slower when you time it. We are taught early to never trust what someone says about time, always find an objective way to measure it.
It is why I (right-handed) was tфught by my first boss on first job in 2000s to use left hand for the mouse: secondary hand for secondary task (I'm not designer, artist or pro-gamer, so keyboard is primary tool).
Now I have a big problem with this: there is no good left-handed mouses on the market anymore, and symmetric mouses has right-handed buttons (and no thumb buttons like forward-backward or left-handed side). Buttons can be swapped in OS, but it messed up remote access like VNC or RDP to systems without swapped buttons... So, buttons must be swapped physically. No luck.
Most of the useful keyboard shortcuts are chordable from the left hand. Left mouse is inconvenient for that. I'm lefty and stuck using left mouse periodically due to injuries and I don't love it but it's tolerable. For the mouse situation I just stick to symmetric 3-button mice and never swap buttons so I can change hands or have a coworker use the mouse uninterrupted.
I also mouse left-handed, but it never occurred to me to swap the buttons from the right-handed configuration. It's always been a practical thing. The only mice I'm likely to have within reach at any point are probably right-handed, so I just had to learn that way. Left click with middle finger, right click with index.
I would kill for a true ambi five-button mouse to replace my old Microsoft Intellimouse, but I've run into the same problem, they just don't seem to exist anymore. All five button mice on the market either have both buttons 4 and 5 on the left side for righties, or have a grotesquely unbalanced design in some other way.
Looks like Steelserise Sensei Ten is ambi, symmetrical, with two additional buttons on each side. But not on a cheap side. If you can find one. It is still present on site, but I cannot find places which sell it.
> I would kill for a true ambi five-button mouse to replace my old Microsoft Intellimouse, but I've run into the same problem, they just don't seem to exist anymore.
I was going to say Steelseries Sensei but it looks like those have been discontinued.
It has one problem: buttons not swapped physically! Yes, leftmost button is primary one (first), and rightmost is secondary (third).
I have this one and use it, with software swapping, but each time I login to remote computer via RDP I need to un-swap in settings again and then back :-(
It is striking, that Logitech forgot how to make proper left-handed mouse. Their older models (discontinued for long time) were perfectly Ok!
Also, it very small for my hand. But better than nothing.
Fwiw this is how cars work when you change to a country that drives on the other side of the road. It seems like mirroring the car would make sense. But really everything is shifted to the opposite side as a translation without reflection. It's easier to manufacture, but as many of you will know and is apparent to all rental agencies, adapting doesn't take long for the average driver, even on manual transmission.
My trouble is I really do want an ambi mouse, not a lefty mouse, since I like to switch back and forth (and always game right-handed.) Maybe I should just get one of each..
Well, I usually use the mouse to select text. And then I usually use the mouse to put the cursor precisely where I need to paste. So even in a Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V workflow, I'm using the mouse as much.
If you're using something like vim or emacs then yeah I would agree with you but for something like docker commands, there's just no easy way to copy a specific container ID without using the mouse (if there is let me know lol).
My logic is if your hand is already on the mouse, it's going to be faster to paste with a mouse than your keyboard.
> for something like docker commands, there's just no easy way to copy a specific container ID without using the mouse
Some terminals have a mode where you can move the cursor around the history, and allow searching / copying / pasting. Alacritty and tmux come to mind, others may also implement something similar.
Haven’t tried this yet but I literally just loaded the OG PC version on my steam deck.
The originals are amazing but I have to say for all their faults, the Definitive Editions figured out the camera. For anyone that played the OG versions you were stuck with the “follow cam” unless you had a PC + Mouse
It's funny when I see it used in a heated political conversation on X, and when it disproves a conservative talking point, I've seen it then called, unironically, liberal and woke.
Yes, same way we need to worry about people being fooled into sending tons of gift cards to scammers or letting scammers install trojans on their computer. There is a slice of the pie that is personal responsibility, but there is a larger piece where efforts can be made to prevent these problems by the developers or OEMs.
> At this point Microsoft office suite is practically a monopoly.
There are loads of competitors in the space. Google Docs, LibeOffice, OnlyOffice, WPS Office, and I'm sure there are many others in the space that are lesser known. All of these are compatible with Office formats.
I experienced this first hand maybe a year ago when I randomly walked into a dollar general to get something, their prices often times are pretty close to the "regular" versions of the product, but packaged specifically for dollar stores.
I get why people shop at them in rural places because that's the only shop within 10-20 miles but in cities it makes no sense. Had prices been 20-30% cheaper but in a smaller size it would still be a ripoff but an understandable one, but often times I saw products that were priced just 3-5% below their standard counterparts while giving you maybe 30%-50% of the product.
Every store has some stuff that is overpriced compared to peers and some stuff that is underpriced. Dollar stores make their money more on drastic understaffing (leading to the issue in the article) and national scale than they do on being a consistently worse value. They have the cheapest freeze dried strawberries by weight you can get anywhere other than making them yourself.
Same. My city has a Walmart, Publix, Food Lion, Kroger, and Aldi. Yet they keep building dollar stores, I think there's now 5 within 10 miles of my house. They all seem to do decent traffic, which baffles me. The stores are a mess, items disheveled everywhere, and rare to see more than a single person working. Really depressing places, I cannot figure out their appeal.
People still think they’re getting. Deal. They’ll figure it out eventually. Same with goodwill selling clothes for at or above new prices, eventually the knowledge propagates.
The main thing keeping the local dollar stores alive is the death of Party City as far as I can tell.
> Apart from the exfiltration of data, the complete absence of any savings or efficiencies, and the fact that DOGE closed as soon as the exfiltration was over?
IMHO everyone kinda knew from the start that DOGE wouldn't achieve much because the cost centers where gains could realistically be made are off-limits (mainly social security and medicare/medicaid). What that leaves you with is making cuts in other small areas and sure you could cut a few billion here and there but when compared against the governments budget, that's a drop in the bucket.
Social security, Medicare, and Medicaid are properly termed "entitlements", not "cost centers". You're right that non-discretionary spending dwarfs discretionary spending though.
Entitlements cost quite a bit of money to fulfill.
Quibbling over terminology doesn't erase the point - that a significant portion of the Federal budget is money virtually everyone agrees shouldn't be touched much.
You're not wrong, I edited my comment. That said, I think it is important to use clear terminology that doesn't blur the lines between spending that can theoretically be reduced, versus spending that requires an act of Congress to modify. DOGE and the executive have already flouted that line with their attempts to shutter programs and spending already approved by Congress.
>Entitlements cost quite a bit of money to fulfill.
Entitlements are funded by separate (FICA) taxes which form a significant portion of all federal income, they are called entitlements for that specific reason.
> Quibbling over terminology doesn't erase the point - that a significant portion of the Federal budget is money virtually everyone agrees shouldn't be touched much.
Quibbling over quibbling without mentioning the separate account for FICA/Social Security taxes is a sure sign of manipulation. As is not mentioning that the top 10% are exempt from the tax after a minuscule for them amount.
Oh, and guess what - realized capital gains are not subject to Social Security tax - that's primarily how rich incomes are made. Then, unrealized capital gains aren't taxed at all - that's how wealth and privilege are accumulated.
All this is happening virtually without opposition due to rich-funded bots manipulating any internet chatter about it. Is it then surprising that manipulation has reached a level of audacity that hypes solving the US fiscal problems at the expense of grandma's entitlements?
> Entitlements are funded by separate (FICA) taxes which form a significant portion of all federal income, they are called entitlements for that specific reason.
No, they aren't, categorically, and no, that’s not what the name refers to. Entitlements include both things with dedicated taxes and specialized trust funds (Social Security, Medicare), and things that are normal on-budget programs (Medicaid, etc.)
Originally, the name “entitlement” was used as a budget distinction for programs based on the principle of an earned entitlement (in the common language sense) through specific work history (Social Security, Medicare, Veterans benefits, Railroad retirement) [0], but it was later expanded to things like Medicaid and welfare programs that are not based on that principle and which were less politically well-supported, as a deliberate political strategy to drive down the popularity of traditional entitlements by association.
[0] Some, but not all, of which had dedicated trust funds funded by taxes on the covered work, so there is a loose correlation between them and the kind of programs you seem to think the name exclusively refers to, but even originally it was not exclusively the case.
You aren't following the conversation in this thread, my reply wasn't about the definition of "entitlements" but about the separate taxes and the significant tax income from them, which is true for the real entitlements - Social security and Medicare.
More precisely, the question is about the tax structure that results in a shortfall, it seems strange to argue about cutting Social Security and Medicare when both corporate profits and the market are higher than ever while income inequality is at astronomic levels.
I can't say much about Medicaid but I know the cost of drugs and medical care have been going up faster than anything else, so there might be some other way of addressing that spending. I'd be perfectly fine with demanding a separate tax for Medicaid and discussing it separately, that would be the prudent way of doing it.
That's more than the entire discretionary budget. Cutting that much requires cutting entitlements, even if the government stopped doing literally everything else.
Honest question for companies like Oracle, Google and Microsoft that own the trademark to Javascript, Go and Typescript respectively. What value does it bring to these companies to own these trademarks?
The only case I can really see is someone going off and creating another language and then proceeding to call it, Javascript, Typscript or Go and then using the same logo but I feel at that point the developer community would be pretty effective in sorting that out without getting lawyers involved.
Well, look at how Microsoft tried to hijack the JVM back in the 90s. I think the big fear is that somebody creates a "mostly compatible" product, that in fact isn't 100% compatible, and tries to market it as the same thing as the original, which in fact isn't the original.
Based on the link someone put in a different comment about them suing Deno, at least in Oracle's case the answer is presumably "being able to sue people and get money from them".
Even if that weren't the case though, I think part of the problem is that even if the trademarks literally never brings any value, it also potentially costs them nothing to retain them (unless someone tries to get it invalidated, at which point there's some cost to trying to defend it). Arguably the cost to establish in the trademark in the first place is also low enough that companies at that scale don't have much incentive notto establish them in the first piece; they already have lawyers and trademarking things isn't really out of the ordinary for them, so the marginal cost of having them file one more isn't very high.
It's worth considering whether the point you make about there not being much of a realistic concern around someone else attempting to copy the name is something that would be obvious to non-developers. Sometimes what might be obvious to a developer might not be obvious to a lawyer, and at the end of the day, the legal team is probably in charge of deciding things like this at these companies, so in the absence of pressure from someone who understands this point enough influence to make it happen (like maybe a C-level exec), it might not matter that the concern is realistic if it's theoretically plausible.
IMHO the Gnome team should bake in Dash to Dock and Desktop Icons NG into the core package. To me they are essential to get a proper functioning desktop in Gnome and it blows my mind that they are just 3rd party extensions when really it should be 1st party support.
Was never a fan of Desktop icons, nor dash or dock. I use none. And I feel they just adds clutter. Only reason I have the top panel visible, because I need to see the time. Heh.
I don’t understand desktop icons. Why spend the time finding the thing, moving your hand to the mouse and clicking when you can just hit super, type the first 2 or 3 characters, done.
What advantages do they bring in so that they need to be baked in? Like a good comparison between what you do with them and how problematic do you think the idiomatic interaction is.
Currently working on a SaaS app that could be called an "AI Wrapper". One thing I picked up on is once you start using AI tools programmatically, you can start doing far more complex things than what you can with ChatGPT or Claude.
One thing we've leaned heavily into was using Langgraph for agentic workflows and it's really opened the door to cool ways you can use AI. These days the way I tell apart an AI "Wrappers" vs "Tools" is what is the underlying paradigm. Most "wrappers" just copy the paradigm of ChatGPT/Claude where you have a conversation with an agent, the "tools" are where you take the ability to generate content and then plug that into a broader workflow.
> One thing we've leaned heavily into was using Langgraph for agentic workflows
Probably my single biggest mistake so far with developing LLM tooling so far has been to try to use Langgraph even after inspecting the codebase, because people I thought were smarter than me hyped it up.
Do yourself a favor and just write the plumbing yourself, it's a lot easier than one might think before digging into it, and tool calling is literally a loop passing tool requests and responses back and forth until the model responds, and having your own abstractions will make it a lot easier to build proper workflows. Plus you get to use whatever language you want and don't have to deal with Python.
There really isn't need, all they add is additional code to be responsible for, building the same abstractions yourself but focused on your use case will be something like 50-100 lines of code, hard to beat the simplicity, and the understanding you'll get.
reply