fourwd

I've never understood why GNU/Linux actually needs swap. Okay, I created a 4G partition for it, having 32G of RAM. I never used all that RAM, but even so, stuff regularly ends up in swap. Why does the OS waste write cycles on my SSD if it doesn't have to?

However, if I artificially fill up all 32G of RAM, the system almost completely freezes faster than switching to using swap as a "lifeline". And it only comes back to life when OOM Killer finally remembers its existence and kills some f__ing important process.

Have you tried Debian?

What about using enums? In this case you will have to specify them for all records, but this ensures that the field will always be present.

enum license_owner {
    regular_citizen = 0,
    embassy,
    government,
    ...
}

You can use tools like spotdl and yt-dlp to download songs from YouTube music and Spotify

To get quality like this https://youtu.be/cX4KA-AFS9M ? Nah thanks.

It would be better for your nerves to just do a normal GNU/Linux installation. There are too many ways the installation can go wrong:

replace swap partition with ISO contents

For example, Ubuntu ISO has a size of 5.7G. But my swap, which you previously deactivated, was 4G. Either 2G, or it didn't exist at all.

move user data from C:/ to other partition

The other partition may not exist or may have capacity smaller than C:/.

replace C:/ with linux

The installed Linux must also be stored somewhere. And there is also a copy partition for C. The same problem of lack of space.

move user data to /home/$username

From %APPDATA%? You would have to be a know-it-all to resolve the location paths and configuration names of literally every existing program.

reboot into linux

~~And it is at this moment that Windows will completely randomly decide to update and rewrite the bootloader :)~~

In Elixir, we mark statuses by using a question mark at the end of the variable name. Something like this:

authorized? = user |> get_something() |> ensure_authorized?()

I like this better than the is_ prefix

so not sure why you think one or the other is less complicated

Because of this:

And some note by the author of the scheme:

Unfortunately, the operation of bash startup scripts is dependent on patches added by OS distributions

Why should I guess at the tea leaves instead of just using deterministic zsh?

console.log() is really easy to learn, but what happens after that is a complete "wtf"

Bash has a very strange sequence of sourcing scripts like .bash_profile and others, and the type of shell (interactive or not) adds fuel to the fire. There is no chance to sort through this bunch of init files in order to correctly and conveniently set up environment variables. In zsh, only 3 files are needed for proper configuration; it couldn’t be easier.

Why don't you just remove all plugins and use standard zsh? All sorts of oh-my-soy are not really needed.

The language idea is good, but: THREE.WebGLRenderer: A WebGL context could not be created. Reason: WebGL is currently disabled.

Seriously? Why do I need WebGL to read TEXT in docs? :/