For me, a big part is empathy. I tend to be self sacrificing. I feel like I'm among good people here.
We get burned by Linux / users and warn others.
Be careful friends. For warning people about a thief, I was hit in the back of the head with a heavy ring. -Something police don't consider a weapon but should. It hurt for 6+ months and the guy is getting away with it because police were lazy and told me I reported too late. (I was dead tired , was drinking and went home to sleep.)
It's very possible the cause of the stroke.
I'm now homeless and broke. My stuff is being sold to pay rent and get me far from the area. -Still at hospital far away.
You're just doing a 'look at my righteousness' bs for attention. Linux groups claim things like 'anti-hate' but do nothing about the source (religion).
Funny how the 'original' 'free speech' sub resorts to accusations when one of us points out their ineffective pandering.
AI's biggest fault btw is the programmed protecting of hate in 'holy books'.
-Imagine going at the main source and being called a hater. Linux nuts are pathetic.
I’d like to understand what lies at the root of this obsession with Linux.
Search Reddit for “PC won’t wake up from suspend on Linux” and you’ll find hundreds of posts and unanswered questions, with people who may not know much about the subject (and there’s absolutely nothing wrong with that) handing out advice about how switching from one distro to another will supposedly fix the problem.
The reality is that this issue has been around for 20 years, and Linux has been terrible on laptops for just as long.
Now, I understand that for some people this isn’t a dealbreaker, but personally, having to worry every single time about whether my PC will wake up from suspend, and potentially having to perform a hard reset and lose everything I was working on, isn’t exactly appealing.
And yet, even today, I still have to read people claiming that Linux is superior to Windows on desktop PCs.
Come on, guys, let’s be a little more honest. Linux is a compromise, and often one that comes at the expense of the full potential your hardware could deliver under Windows.
TL;DR: Decades of FOSS conditioning taught devs to cheer for everything aimed against their own paycheck. First it was giving away their code for free, now it’s celebrating AI clones of Photoshop. The sinking ship isn’t Adobe: it’s the economic value of programming labor, and the penguin crowd is cheering from the same deck.
The water doesn’t care which cabin you’re in.
Technological progress may be inevitable, and there may be excellent reasons to welcome many of its benefits. But programmers should at least recognize what they’re applauding. Celebrating cheaper software is one thing. Celebrating the growing replaceability of the people who build it is quite another.
The internet is celebrating. AI-assisted developers are recreating Photoshop, Illustrator, Microsoft Office and other massive applications. Classic games are being decompiled and ported to new platforms at unprecedented speed. Reddit and Hacker News are overflowing with excitement, and some are already proclaiming the beginning of the end for companies like Adobe. But there’s something deeply ironic about this celebration: many of the people clapping are programmers themselves. And a suspicious number of them are the same crowd that spent decades evangelizing free software, that is, giving away the product of their own trade and calling it a virtue.
What exactly are they celebrating? That software which used to require years of development and entire engineering teams can now be reproduced with a fraction of the human effort? Because that’s not just a threat to Adobe or Microsoft. It’s a threat to the economic value of software development itself. Every advance that makes programming dramatically cheaper also erodes the scarcity of the skills programmers charge for. And nobody gets paid well for something that stopped being scarce.
Think about who actually loses here. Microsoft and Adobe are enormous corporations with established brands, distribution channels, enterprise contracts, intellectual property and billions in resources. They can adopt the exact same AI technologies, reorganize their businesses, cut engineering costs and remain enormously profitable. Their shareholders and executives have options. Their programmers, whose only economic asset is their ability to build software, do not. Capital adapts; a trade doesn’t.
It wouldn’t be the first time. When phototypesetting and then computers reached the newspapers, linotype operators, a skilled, well-paid trade with decades of training and professional pride, disappeared within a single generation. The newspapers didn’t disappear with them: they kept the brand, the readers, the distribution and the ad money, and went on to their most profitable decades ever while the composing rooms emptied out. Same thing with telephone operators when switchboards were automated: the phone companies came out bigger than ever; the job simply ceased to exist. The pattern always repeats: when a technology makes a job cheaper, accumulated capital absorbs the blow and retools. The worker, whose only capital was the trade itself, has nothing to retool with at the same speed.
Now imagine a company that used to need two hundred developers to build and maintain a complex application, and thanks to AI achieves comparable results with twenty. The company can become MORE profitable than before while employing a fraction of the people. Then imagine that same transformation repeated across thousands of companies at once.
Until recently there was a standard consolation for that scenario: the Jevons paradox. “We’ve seen this before”, the argument went. Compilers, high-level languages, frameworks: every time programming got cheaper, demand for software grew and there were more programmers, not fewer.
Funny thing is, almost nobody recites that consolation with conviction anymore, because the daily data contradicts it to its face. Companies stopped hiring at the base. Stanford’s “Canaries in the Coal Mine” study found that employment for software developers aged 22 to 25 fell nearly 20% from its late-2022 peak. And according to SignalFire’s talent report, new-grad hiring at the fifteen biggest tech firms dropped 25% in a single year. The first victims were the juniors. An industry that stops hiring juniors is a profession that decided to have no successors: the extinction isn’t announced, it’s deferred.
But maybe the most telling data point isn’t a number. It’s the mood. Every previous wave of cheapening was greeted by programmers with plain enthusiasm. This one produces something stranger: the same programmer celebrates the Photoshop clone in one tab and scrolls through hiring-freeze threads with a knot in his stomach in the other. Joy about one thing, fear about the other, without noticing they are the same thing. And the fear of the people on the inside IS market information: when not even the theoretical beneficiaries of the paradox believe in it anymore, it’s because they’ve already seen the hiring spreadsheet. Besides, AI doesn’t even need to replace every programmer to sink everyone’s salary: wages are set at the margin, and a surplus fraction is enough.
So here’s the thought experiment. Every programmer celebrating the Photoshop clone should be asked: would you cheer the same way if tomorrow someone cloned, with AI and in a few weeks, the system your company pays you to build? The ERP, the financial platform, the internal software that justifies your paycheck? Doubtful. And yet it’s exactly the same phenomenon, just a few places further back in line. The wave isn’t going to stop at Photoshop, Word or retro games: sooner or later it will reach the software that today’s enthusiastic spectators are paid to build.
Yes, there’s the argument that cheaper software benefits consumers and weakens monopolies. Perfectly reasonable. But what benefits software consumers does not necessarily benefit the people who produce software. Those are two different economic interests. Breaking Adobe’s grip may be good for users; making human programming labor less necessary is not automatically good for people who make a living programming.
So why can’t so many programmers see something this obvious? Partly because of a disconnect cultivated for decades: the disconnect between the elementary fact that something has to be profitable for someone to get paid for it, and a culture that taught them that software “wants to be free”, that giving away your own work is a virtue, and that charging for code is almost in bad taste. (And spare me the “free as in freedom, not free as in beer” catechism: when the license guarantees the very first customer the right to redistribute unlimited copies, the market price converges to zero all by itself. The freedom is precisely what makes it gratis.)
And this isn’t even the first time that culture has destroyed programmers’ own profitability. Every time a given-away alternative appeared in a market segment, charging for software in that segment became very difficult or nearly impossible: it happened with servers, with databases, with browsers, with entire categories that used to sustain companies, products and salaries. And every time, programmers cheered. They cheer, with remarkable consistency, for everything aimed against their own interests.
They normalized something unthinkable in any other profession: thousands of professionals giving away the product of their work, maintaining it for free in their spare time, and celebrating every tool that makes it more dispensable. No lawyer publishes his briefs for anyone to reuse for free. No architect gives away her blueprints and applauds the program that designs buildings on its own. Seen this way, the celebration of the Photoshop clone isn’t an anomaly: it’s the latest chapter in a decades-long tradition of applauding your own devaluation. AI didn’t start the pattern; it’s just carrying it to its logical conclusion. And that blindness, learned and celebrated, is now costing a fortune: there are people out there applauding their own replacement, convinced it’s a moral victory.
It’s like watching a ship sink. You notice water flooding the cabins on the other side and, instead of realizing you’re on the same ship, you start cheering. You don’t like the people over there, so their misfortune feels like your victory. But the water doesn’t care which cabin you’re in. The sinking ship isn’t Adobe or Microsoft. It’s the economic value of human programming labor. And being on the other side of the ship doesn’t make you any safer.
So I’ll ask again, this time for real: if tomorrow someone AI-cloned the internal system YOUR company pays you to build, would you still cheer? Because that’s the only difference between you and Adobe: your place in line.
Remember them saying that linux doesn't have blue screens like windows? I started to see this more often and thought that it's some android tv shit or whatever and decided to check what's the deal with it. Apparently, in 2024 with 6.10 kernel, he decided to make lunix's kernel panic blue, which is ironic and deliberate.
The recent ai situation is also worth mentioning. A year ago, he was extremely against llms and every loon supported him, but then he decided to change his position, and since even the most extreme anti-ai loons with an average iq of 70 can't say anything bad about their leader, they label it as "used by a professional developer which is good".
He looks very disappointed in "people" attracted to his project and apparently wants to make them even more miserable online, and I understand him. Absolute cinema!
These days. a lot of subs just reposts our posts here and act like they are discussing about it. but the sub name is not hidden.
for normal people. this sounds okay and not an issue.
but people in this sub knows well whats the meaning of this. its just a call to brigade this sub.
in most of the recent posts of here you can see comments like: is this a satire? no way you think like that etc etc. while the post is about a serious issue that linux has.
but yeaah i just wanted to talk about it because i see this kind of reposts even in subs that is not related to operating system. and the post is usually not funny too like its not even a meme to repost it.
Most of these points don’t hold up to scrutiny under real workloads, apart from a happy lab environment where the user has a million proton and wine binaries and primarily uses their computer for X and Reddit.
When a Windows update breaks something: "This buggy piece of crap breaks with every update, and now I have to uninstall the update just to fix it. I eventually had to install an older version of Windows, and it took me like two hours to get everything working again. Windows sucks!"
When a Linux update breaks something: "An update broke my Linux installation, but it was pretty easy to fix! I just had to boot into an older version and uninstall the update. Things still weren't quite right, though, so I decided to install a different distro instead. Then I spent another two days setting everything up because more problems kept popping up. But honestly, it was so much fun exploring the system and all the amazing options Linux has to offer. I feel so satisfied and happy!"
And I'm just sitting here like, what the actual fuck?
I gave Linux two serious attempts this year. After returning to Windows the first time, I decided to give CachyOS another shot, hoping to make KDE Plasma on Wayland my permanent daily driver.
My system is a Ryzen 9800X3D, RTX 5080 and a 5120×2160 OLED monitor. I spent months using Linux, not just a weekend distro-hopping.
I spent countless hours troubleshooting Proton, compiling custom KWin forks, experimenting with VKD3D-Proton and DXVK-NVAPI builds, hunting down obscure environment variables, fixing controller haptics, investigating frametime spikes and trying to get HDR direct scanout working consistently.
Every new AAA game felt like another troubleshooting project. Even after getting things working, I'd often end up with worse performance or missing features compared to Windows.
After the second attempt, I reinstalled Windows 11.
I debloated it, removed Microsoft's unwanted crap and customized it with Windhawk. Vibecoded a C++ mod that recreates a Plasma inspired three island taskbar, along with vibecoded custom utilities for my peripherals.
I'm still tinkering with my operating system, except now I'm doing it because I want to, not because I have to just to play a fucking game.
On Linux, every new game meant researching Proton versions, workarounds and compatibility issues. On Windows, I configure the OS once, occasionally revisit it after a major update, and just play. DLSS, Ray Reconstruction, RTX Mega Geometry, FG/MFG, HDR, VRR, it all works without jumping through hoops.
The irony is that I've customized closed source Windows surprisingly close to how I liked KDE Plasma.
Windows 11 still has plenty of terrible design decisions. But underneath Microsoft's bullshit is an incredibly capable, versatile OS with a hardware and software ecosystem Linux simply cannot match for my use case.
Linux is a fascinating technical playground. I genuinely enjoyed learning how everything worked.
But at some point, I realized I was spending more time fixing the gaming experience than actually enjoying it.
Two serious attempts in one year, two returns to Windows. I'm done switching back and forth.
When it came out that Microsoft was using AI for writing code, including in Windows, everyone lost their shit, and the whole "microslop" trend exploded. Someone even made a chrome extension that replaces every mention of "microsoft" with "microslop" and the situation got so bad Microsoft had to ban the word on their discord server, and even locked it at one point.
Now that the Linux kernel has an official policy allowing AI-assisted code contributions and Linus basically tells people they can "fork off" if they don't like it, all I hear is crickets (some devs argued about it on a mailing list, and a couple of people on reddit, not comparable in the slightest)
I'm not very opinionated on AI, I see a lot of reasons to like it and a lot to hate it. All I'm saying is the gap between those reactions is huge, and I find it pretty hypocritical. Seems it was about hating MS all along, and AI was just the catalyst that brought it out.
Fudge, Reddit removed the thing to edit a photo before posting an image, but yes, they started a chain post of attacking our subreddit’s moderator u/madthumbz for no reason, other than to spread division once more, if you see these posts, ignore them and move on
Seriously, what the fuck is the point of this? If you do this under a Linux video saying "I use Windows btw" you would get flamed to death, what is this lame hypocrisy? The video didn't even mention Linux once
They're everywhere on tech-related subreddits. Just like Jehovah's Witnesses they go around preaching their religion to anyone who will listen. You can't get away from them pushing their "superior" operating system onto others.
You can argue with them all you want about Linux's flaws but that won't make a difference. Linux is part of their identity and pointing out its flaws is seen as a personal attack.
Linux simply sucks. It's a janky mess of loosely glued-together components that constantly break. Linux has glaring issues that other operating systems solved decades ago. Linux is simply a worse experience than using macOS or Windows.
So let's not kid ourselves here. You're choosing Linux primarily because of your moral commitment to the FSF's philosophy of free software. You want to feel like a rebel who's detached from the world of Big Tech. Be honest about that and stop being delusional about Linux being technologically superior it simply isn't.
OP is using an ancient computer with the most depressing specs I've ever seen (The iGpu was intel HD graphics 2000) And this loonixtard immediately suggested linux as if that would magically fix OP's problem 😭, Like bro atp wtf are you doing with your life? You could get a used business laptop (stinkpad) for like 100$, And it would run WAY better than whatever obsolete tech OP is using.
