You can get pretty far with copy-pasting. If you want to try it out, you should first realize that there's always 10+ different ways to do the same thing. Stick with what works and with what seems the most intuitive to you.
Personally, I suggest going straight for a flake-based setup. Flakes are somehow still labeled experimental, but they're actually mature and broadly adopted.
After trying out a few distros over the last 20 years or so (~~open~~SUSE, Ubuntu, Debian, Arch, Fedora and Silverblue were the ones I actively used for a stretch of time on desktop, Debian and CentOS on server), I also landed on NixOS.
Who knows what the future brings, but things feel more settled to me than they ever have. Maybe that's because there's a (declarative) solution for every custom setup, it's just a function of time and profiency in Nix. Or maybe it's because I invested quite a bit of work into a trivially reproducible setup for most of my machines and workflows (all in one glorious version-controlled flake), that the sunk costs are too high to switch elsewhere.
I'm still willing to experiment with DEs/WMs, currently running Gnome on my main and Sway on weaker machines. Hyprland is a bit out there for my taste, but I'm really looking forward to giving Cosmic DE a try once it's ready.
I use (neo)vim with UltiSnips for coding, text editing and writing e-mails, and it works great! It's super customizable.
I'm looking forward to try it myself... and also wondering if I'll ever be able to read it as b-cache-fs rather than bca-chefs.
home.packages = with pkgs; [
# ...
qbittorrent
];
I use btrbk (on a btrfs filesystem) and I've never been happier. It fits my workflow perfectly: Frequent automated local snapshots with the occasional incremental backup to one of several encrypted external drives. It's fast and reproducible since it's all in a single conf file.
I would generally agree, but 1) there may well be dead wood just under the grass and 2) these conditions may explain the atypical stem. Never fully trust ID by pic and opinions on the internet obviously but this looks very much like Pleurotus ostreatus to me. (Also because there aren't many alternative candidates in my opinion.)
There are nicer ways of saying this but I agree that this is not Leucocoprinus birnbaumii, but some sort of Conocybe.
Yeah, that's pretty interesting. It's one of those mushrooms that in a pinch you could probably eat and it wouldn't kill you. Supposedly tastes okay, too.
Looks a lot like Paxillus involutus. Cute dog.
Definitely not oysters. Possibly Tapinella atrotomentosa.
In my experience, the only way to "really know" a mushroom is to find it repeatedly, have it in your hand, smell it, and have someone next to you who really knows their stuff and talk to them about the mushroom in your hand, and learn that way what characteristics to look for. Then find it again, identify it yourself, confirm with an expert. Repeat until you don't have to ask.
Into the breach