It in fact is.

> Go back 5 years and you'd be right.

I’m right now.

I’ve done the testing myself, and the testing has been done by others. The vast majority of titles, especially modern titles still work better on windows. Linux only users got excited and make the claim otherwise based off a handful of cherry picked and poorly performed benchmarks and now repeat this claim endlessly despite in every sense of the word it being entirely false.

Is the situation improved? Vastly. Viable for many? Completely. I’m not saying more games dont run better on today on Linux than they used too, but this idea the majority now run better on Linux is a complete fallacy and that’s before getting into things like perhaps daring to want to use the ray tracing features you may enjoy or you in fact may not want to deal with compatibility issues which in fact very much still exist outside of kernel level anti cheat and denuvo.

From your very own link:

> There are different degrees of compatibility gamers must consider when checking if their favorite Windows games work on Linux distros like Mint, Zorin, Bazzite, or even SteamOS.

This != The majority of games now run better on Linux, it only equals that they will run in some capacity.

It in fact is. Do you often go around making claims you are entirely unqualified to make? Or is this something new you’re trying?

Let’s not leave out all the ones that don’t. Which is in fact, the majority of them. Strange how that’s always left out, we wouldn’t want to mislead people now would we?

Yes, it’s your inability to do even the most basic verification of the data underlying your understanding before making claims.

I don’t know literally anyone using twitter and yet obviously people do.

Perhaps what the individuals we know are doing are in fact reflective of not very much.

I’ve found some of my favourite music in the last decade, during a time in my life by which it’s generally considered that your tastes are set.

I wouldn’t use a display from this close. It’s better for my eyes to have a larger display a little further away. I’m closer to 30” with a 32” and another desk with a 38”

> but for people who read, code, do productive stuff, it's too much screen, too much pixels.

I do all of those things and find the opposite. So it would seem it’s more down to individual preference.

> WQHD res seems just about right.

I would dislike this. Especially for text and even more at closer distances.

Guilty.

Oh how cute, we are dusting off the cover on the greatest hits! I remember hearing this one back in the early 2000's! Unrelated, how many WMDs did they find in Iraq again? You know what, never mind, i'm sure it was just LOADS obviously!

> The US knows how to exit this.

Oh yeah, how's that? They gonna spend twenty years and $2.3 trillion dollars there?

I keep seeing this claim yet it my experience it doesnt hold water. I pay for the models, most people I know pay for the models, and we see all of the exact same issues.

I have Claude and ChatGPT both bullshit and lick my ass on the regular. The ass licking will occur regardless of instruction.

I think i'm going to let people decide for themselves what they enjoy in their job rather than pretending I know better than they do what they should and should not enjoy.

You should be delivering this advice to your nearest mirror.

You think wrong. I’m now encountering people on a regular basis arguing “those days are behind us” and it’s “old news.”

No, you’re just shifting the goalposts.

The original claim was “The president of the United States was friends with the supposed leader of a pedophile ring.”

Your response to that was to imply that over time, they had a falling out. To which my point was, so what? It doesn’t materially change the original claim you challenged.

A falling out in NO way changes that the original statement was correct, the current president of the United States, Donald J Trump, was good friends with the alleged leader of a large scale pedophile network.

> If someone's outed as a pedophile, everyone who's friends with him should be assumed to be a pedophile?

If a given friend had their own history of acting like a creepy sex pest when it comes to young women, had a known and close relationship with the alleged leader of a pedophile network AND knew about “the girls”, would I assume them also to be a pedophile? At a minimum, I may in fact conclude that the odds they are also a pedophile are significantly higher than that of the average individual. Birds of a feather and all…

It’s not to say they are of course and it may in fact be as simple as they are nothing more than a creepy sex pest with a bad taste in friends, but NOT a pedophile. I gotta be honest but, me personally, I’d rather be neither.

And? It doesn’t change the reality of the original statement.

The president of the United States was friends with the alleged ring leader of a large pedophile network.

I’ve tended to hold the same opinion of what the average SWE thinks everyone else does.