You jest. On the other hand, it'll stop those insane return-to-office mandates though, as all new development will be remote.

If you say "which should be available in both architectures aren't" then I guess you're using Ubuntu not Debian. In Debian, all release architectures had >=98% archive coverage since forever with few exceptions, never below 96%, and non-moribund -ports are also >= 90%.

Things are worse outside Debian proper: for a time I maintained an out-of-archive arch but gave up because of the monstrosity that are binNMU version numbers. That's why derivatives (including even Ubuntu) use sourceful uploads for rebuilds.

As for appImages: they deserve no words other than an exorcism formula. Same for Snap.

If you still run Windows games, then pirate instead of using DRM like Steam. They'll continue to work forever because of emulation.

The whole 32-bit Windows brouchacha comes only because of people not being told which arch to install. Microsoft had to keep 32-bit for a while because of 1. broken BIOSes in computers sold before ~2010, and 2. their software sucking balls when it comes to DLL hell. But then, if the installer shown them a popup like "you're installing 32-bit system on a machine capable of 64-bit, are you sure?", there wouldn't be a non-negligible install base anymore.

Or alternatively, they could have implemented in-place upgrades like they do with Win7->Win10->Win11. Meanwhile, I'm still running a multiply migrated and crossgraded Debian system that was initially i386 potato.

Why? The point of multiarch is precisely to allow you to upgrade some software to a different arch while keeping support for old binaries that can't be recompiled.

If not for political squabblings, we'd even have an arch for every major ISA bump or ABI break. But alas, some people are opposed to "arch proliferation" and we have to suffer stuff like that lib*t64 transition which added a lot of unnecessary work while breaking existing binaries.

What you're preaching is multilib, which had been transitioned away for a good reason.

Given that you say "game laptop" and that you can run Steam at all, that's obvious.

In the last two decades, all 32-bit machines were either embedded, or 64-bit CPUs with a broken BIOS made by idiot vendors for the lowest tiers of the market -- while laptops marketed as game are mid to high end. And I don't think those broken BIOSes were sold anymore after 2010 or so.

Meanwhile, Steam and games do use opcodes added to the ISA a lot later than that, with no fallback. They do use opcodes from newer ISAs, and fall back from those -- but they don't bother to support CPUs that old.

Case in point: recently, at my family place, invading kids blabbed about games. As all my newer machines there are either ARM or RISC-V, I had to attach a Phenom2 box (the very latest stepping, from 2010). An old game that worked before had an update, and boom! -- it kept crashing on startup. I actually looked into the crash dump and disassembled the failing code -- it used an SSE4.2 instruction. I mailed the game's maker, but they weren't amused. Understandably, as to have any playable frame rate on that machine I had to hack up a resolution not supported by the monitor's EDID.

And I hear that Microsoft dropped support for my home X86 desktop -- 2990WX, a fat 64-way Threadripper+, barely 6 years old. Fortunately I have no need for Windows at home, but it shows how much proprietary software companies care.

Fortunately, cold temperatures are a crisis that will soon fix itself thanks to your Dear Orange Leader's foresight.

No, this will make locals breed the snakes. Then, when the bounty program ends, no longer needed snakes will be released into the wild.

It's been tried multiple times...

Tipper Gore, the main driver of this crap in 80s. Janet Reno in 90s. Hillary Clinton in 00s (also got a GTA!). All of them very right wing.

Don't claim it's a right wing issue, it's a bipartisan thing.

Good thing I'm far away from Burgerland, and I have no reason to follow US sanctions.

A named person with a verifiable location and employment is less likely to turn malicious than an unnamed (ie, fake named) one. And, devs who intend to plant a time/logic bomb (in a sanely distributed piece of software) or a simple rug pull (in node.js or docker) will use a proxy in a less suspect part of the world.

Heck, I myself offered a bunch of Cuban guys at a conference a VPN they could use for Github (which bans Cuba as an "evil" country); in the end, they went with someone else who has better ping to Cuba. So here goes the idea of banning devs based on their country...

Thus, you'd need to accept named Russians and ban everyone else, from any country other than Russia (as they might use a proxy). Oops...

Then you travel into the UK, and whoops. Or you have a plane layover in Ol' Blighty. Or there's a storm at your destination airport and your plane gets rerouted.

Unless that cloud keeps immutable undeletable copies of old documents, all the malware needs to do is to trigger cloud sync.

Sorry, no. While Ukrainian infrastructure is nothing compared to western Europe, the power was reliable, infrastructure was functional, and at least the basics worked. The power was provided in a good part by nuclear power plants, transport relied on railroads (like in all ex-soviet countries) which is the only part of infrastructure that really used to work in the Soviet Union. Where the First World has highways and cars, the Second World has railroads. And they form the backbone of transport for both sides of the war. Just as an American will deem it unthinkable that a road is not fixed promptly, for someone in Ukraine (and Russia) it's unthinkable that the railroad won't work. The railroad network might be not dense enough to serve every village, but it does serve every large industrial plant. With Donbass being mostly mines and heavy industry, this meant all important facilities had a direct railroad link.

And as for an average person's standard of life: Ukraine improved a lot. For example, pretty much everyone had proper toilets, while in Russia that's an uncommon thing outside of Moscow and Petersburg districts.

They're not only not rebuilding Donbass, but even pillaging what was left of the industry there. This is the usual Soviet playbook, but quite stands in opposition to claims that Russia is sure it's going to keep their territorial gains.