Do you have a good “getting started” resource for self-hosting that you would point people to?

Well… That’s like alot of steps, lol. In UX design, we would call that a violation of the Three Click rule, and obfuscating the expression of user intent.

Like… Do you gain anything from these launchers? I guess Frosty you opt into because you use it to manage your mods. Maybe launching through that is how your mods get bootstrapped. Kay cool.

Epic games, you definitely need and want to use for other reasons-- Shopping for games and managing your library-- but is it really benefitting you to open that app so that you can open the app you actually want to use? Maybe you have a reason that you actually like that better, idk, but I’d rather just open the app that I want.

And then the EA app… What does it offer that makes it worth putting another step between you and your game? Login to the EA account you don’t need? DRM? Ads for other games? The premise of most launchers is that the company has some goals that you don’t share, and they’re willing to add friction to your experience to achieve those.

Some launchers aren’t so bad. I dunno what EA’s deal is. Speaking of Ubisoft Connect specifically:

• It’s an online-only service that forces you into having an account to play… It’s not just an extra launcher in front of your game
• Ubisoft Connect is part of their DRM mechanism
• It wants admin privileges on your system
• It leaves processes running in the background when you aren’t using it
• And more

Those things aren’t necessarily all bad per se, and you’d certainly tolerate them for some apps… But it’s a big imposition for the company to insist on, IMO, and part of the reason for the launcher hate.

I didn’t downvote btw, I think you’re entitled to your opinion and maybe you’re fine with the launchers you use… But personally, I just choose not to play Ubisoft games for that reason, even though there are games that I would like to have played.

Ubisoft Connect, no thanks.

LOL Right? The contempt is just barely contained by the Wikipedia voice and tone.

Sponsored: TRY MARBLED ROCK ROAST

That art style is called “Alegria” or “Corporate Memphis” and it always makes me feel kind of nauseated, even without the cannibalism.

Yo Throck, you down to hit the frictionless ramp this afternoon?

That second one is the real killer.

Well defined and constrained responsibility: No problem.

Open-ended obligation to people you don’t know: Bottomless pit of potential despair.

Another comment ITT claims that that’s exactly why they did it this way-- Regulations say it must have that property.

Lol I actually kind of like having a lawn to mow, but yeah it sucks to have to.

Is it in your lease that you need to mow the lawn? Here, it’s the landlord’s responsibility unless you specifically agree to it.

Nice. Imagine the lady in the post’s face when she learns that “oom badness” is how they decide which child to sacrifice.

What’s that from?

Yeah lol I’m familiar with “kill child” in a process management context, but I’ve never seen the word “sacrifice” come up. Is that a thing?

I don’t understand the question.

Linux.

But I don’t understand the question.

Is it really less secure than a password? How so?

You can get in some pretty serious messes, though. Any workflow that involves force-pushing or rebasing has the potential for data loss… Either in a literally destructive way, or in a “Seriously my keys must be somewhere but I have no idea where” kind of way.

When most people talk about rebase (for example) being reversible, what they’re usually saying is “you can always reverse the operation in the reflog.” Well yes, but the reflog is local, so if Alice messes something up with her rebase-force-push and realizes she destroyed some of Bob’s changes, Alice can’t recover Bob’s changes from her machine-- She needs to collaborate with Bob to recover them.