Running Slackware-current, using kernel 6.18.13. With a SSD, I'm seeing regular boot times of 12-15 secs, from GRUB2 to SDDM login screen. After supplying credentials, add perhaps 3 seconds more to a fully functional KDE Plasma 6.6 desktop.

It should be noted that Slackware is a systemd-free distribution which uses a simple BSD-like init system. I point out this because early on in systemd's development, one of the selling points was that "it would enable you to have faster boot times".

I will always recommend KDE Plasma as the best desktop environment ever, hands down.But I deeply regret this instance of systemd creep into it, excluding not only the xBSDs, but all other Unices and even systemd-clean distros such as Slackware (the oldest continously maintained Linux distribution). Even more so when it was some time ago where the KDE homepage asked the question: is UNIX ready for the desktop? and described itself as:

KDE is a powerful graphical desktop environment for Unix workstations. It combines ease of use, contemporary functionality and outstanding graphical design with the technological superiority of the Unix operating system.

Well, no longer, it seems. One would have expected such systemd creep from the GNOME folks, not from KDE.

No, it does not -- if it is plugged in with USB-C, it works just like a regular wired keyboard.

- Good battery life
- Good UI, no bloat apps
- 3.5 mm audio jack (so far, essential. I won't buy any device without it)
- Low weight
- Resistance to drops and impacts
- Availability of slide-out physical keyboards preferred.

Game studios spend increasingly more time and resources by providing extremely complex graphics that require a discrete GPU, but are unplayable on PCs with integrated GPUs. They spend more, while locking out a vast source of potential revenue.

If your latest game requires a dual RTX 9000 with a liquid nitrogen cooling system and 3 kW of power usage for the highest settings, be my guest, but do not lock out potential users of your game at the lower end. In doing so, you're saying to millions of would-be gamers "I don't need/want your money".

I'd really love to know how they will ensure that their product is free from trans fats.

Buy and install a single game and you'll download more than 40GB. Didn't BG3 break 100GB on its install?

40 GB is too low an estimate. Newer games are hugely bloated. RDR2 with all DLC is over 100GB too. AC:Origins was originally 45 GB, but now an "update" puts it on 70 GB territory. AC: Valhalla, Borderlands 3, Death Stranding, Far Cry 6 (170 GB), Watch Dogs: Legion, The Last of Us (part I)... all of them are extremely bloated. Downlad a few of them and you're toast under T-Mobile's plan.

I think grandparent refers to bottom, which is a similar system monitor for the terminal which is indeed written in Rust.

So this is a text-based social network with absolutely no web/desktop access, and they wonder why they are losing users? Seriously, what they could expect??

Typing on a mobile tactile keyboard is excruciatingly awful. As long as they don't provide a consistent desktop website from which the user could navigate and type threads, they will keep losing users.

I really don't understand the WHO here. We're not talking about saccharin or cyclamate, we're talking about aspartame! Its formula is rather straightforward: a methyl ester of an aspartate-phenylalanine dipeptide. In acid medium (for example, human stomach) it is hydrolyized to methanol and the two individual aminoacids.

And it has some good drawbacks. It's poison to those with phenylketonuria. And, it's hydrolyzed to methanol, which again is incredibly toxic. So it would be toxic, especially in high quantities... but carcinogenic? Then we would stop eating proteins, because phenylalanine and aspartate are carcinogenic? Doesn't really make any sense to me.

Anyone who claims that aspartame is linked to cancer should offer at least a plausuble explanation of its alleged carcinogenicity.