utopiah

Why? I have a hard time imagine a use case where restoring the OS itself would be appropriate.

I can imagine restoring data, obviously, and services running with their personalization ... but the OS is something generic that should be discarded at whim IMHO. You probably chance few basic configuration of some services and most likely that's stored in /etc but even then 99% is default.

You can identify what you modified via shell history, e.g. history | grep /etc and potentially save them or you can also use find /etc -type f -newerXY with a date later than the OS installation and you should find what you modified. That's probably just a few files.

If you do back up anything beyond /home (which should be on another partition or even disk than the OS anyway) you'll most likely save garbage like /dev that might actually hinder your ability to restore.

So... sure, image the OS if you actually have a good reason for it but unless you work on archiving and restoring legacy hardware for a museum then I doubt you do need that.

Check using e.g. top for your CPU (nvidia-smi or amd-smi for your GPU) or System Monitor on KDE if any of your resource is being maxed out. If so then most likely you found the culprit.

Regarding what the actual codec is being used you can use ffprobe but anyway what matters if resource bottleneck and thus if you can have hardware acceleration for it.

It's probably worth investigating so that you don't keep on getting video files too big for your computer to handle. I imagine it's something very high resolution with very recent compression. If so, look for something less demanding, e.g. x265 720p and if that's still leading to performance hiccups the older x264 720p or even 480p.

It's rare that the media player itself, e.g. VLC or mpv, actually is the bottleneck.

I'm using fWallet for Eurostar, plane tickets, etc anything with PkPass. Very minimalist, just does the job.

• code repository https://gitlab.com/TheOneWithTheBraid/f_wallet
• f-droid delivery https://f-droid.org/packages/business.braid.f_wallet/

Most answers here are opinions which are perfectly valid, even important, but also irrelevant regarding the actual law.

I'm not a regulator or a lawyer so instead of providing another opinion or false information I recommend checking dedicated structures, e.g. AccessNow https://www.accessnow.org/tag/augmented-reality/ or EFF https://www.eff.org/issues/xr while being mindful both of those are from the US and thus if you are not looking for EU specific article, they are basically irrelevant too. You can also check legal research e.g. https://edpl.lexxion.eu/article/EDPL/2024/2/8 which would be useful to get a better understanding of the current legal situation regardless of suggestions.

FWIW this is me speaking for 3min at he European Commission just few weeks ago https://video.benetou.fr/w/65FQnvrncexbJ1jFNKkMrV on providing and using an open stack for smart glasses, more broadly XR, but again this is JUST my perspective, not the actual law. Overall my rule of thumb is now legal situation comes from nothing, so relying on what has existed before, e.g. seeing smart glasses recording as wearable smartphones is at least a starting point.

knowing my software is up to date

Wouldn't that be solved with random notifications saying software X has been updated to version Y.Z even though it might not be true?

The excitement of features from the cutting edge

I don't understand how Debian limits that. You can use Debian for your distribution BUT for whatever you want to be cutting edge, use whatever alternative method you want. It can be alternative package managers, e.g. am but if you want the absolute bleeding edge, go on the repository of the project, get a specific branch, build, install, use. That's absolutely no problem with even Debian stable.

I'm genuinely confused at comments implying that have a stable distribution means having outdated software.

I guess it depends what you mean by "chip production".

AFAICT mostly via Chip War (2022) and reading a bit on the topic there are few bottlenecks, e.g chip design IP like ARM (UK) or lithography machines like ASML (NL) or high efficiency chip production like TSMC (Taiwan) but overall the grip from the US is mostly on democratization and scale with AMD, NVIDIA, Broadcom or even Intel, namely making a LOT of chips, not necessarily high end (some are) or mobile (also some), for a relatively low price. What I mean is that China is already claiming that they are producing about on-par IPS with e.g. Loongson.

So yes there are for sure incumbents based in the US that do not want RISCV and overall open architectures to make significant progress but is it fair to call them "the US" I'm not sure. Are they heavily leaning on US lawmakers to get their positions strengthened? Maybe. Maybe they do not yet do so simply because they don't believe it's a threat yet, nor it might be ever be.

I believe that in chip production you can lock production via innovation but also, like in other sectors, solely with the supply chain. ASML is powerful because they basically own their markets but also because who would contract with newcomers versus a very well established company that can provide all the insurances imaginable that they will indeed deliver on time a specific amount? Why risk it when you are already contracting with the leader?

Sure there is a potential innovator dilemma but what could prevent e.g. NVIDIA or Intel to switch to RISC-V if somehow they can dominate there too thanks to both their existing expertise but also supply chain stronghold?

If you like working in slow motion, yes, sure.

Source : I have a Banana-Pi SBC https://www.banana-pi.org/en/banana-pi-sbcs/175.html and... it works, running Linux proper, with a desktop environment, which is in itself pretty cool IMHO but damn, you have to be patient. That being said "just" already being at that stage on economically affordable hardware is amazing. We are probably not far, say few years at most, with usable RISC-V chips for mundane tasks, e.g. text authoring, coding, Web browsing, but don't expect compilation of a browser, Blender, or gaming on this for few more years. IMHO it will go fast because it's catching up so the path is rather well laid down, which is much harder than innovating and pushing the envelope.

What's nuts is that what made Anubis' author go down that path was Amazon Bot (I remember precisely because they are the bot that also blew up my logs and thus forced me to take action against LLM scrappers) and... a significant share of the Web is hosted on AWS. So... Amazon is actually probably MAKING money by scrapping, no matter how inefficiently. I already hated Amazon but this is even worst than I imagined. It's probably not by design, to be fair, but it's also probably not something they'll invest into "fixing" as it's making them money. What an absolute human centipede situation.

Nice, that'll help people deGoogle I hope.

I won't enter the arguments about Debian itself (did that often enough, feel free to check my history or ignore entirely) rather my point is to have a default suggestion rather than "pick any" for newcomers which precisely are scared by the plethora of choices, as this very post suggests.

It's rare that a software compatibility is distribution specific but just in case for games you can verify with ProtonDB and for the rest WineHQ AppDB. That's assuming there is no native support which in this case according to a quick DuckDuckGo search returns https://linuxvox.com/blog/unreal-engine-linux/ indicating that it seems fine.

So... I'd suggest you pick whatever distribution you heard most about, if you are unsure I'd advise on Debian (Stable) but honestly I don't think it matters much. There might be slight difference in hardware support and performances but assuming you use mainstream hardware it hopefully should have minimal impact.

Regardless of what you choose, document the process and as long as you learn while doing it, you're going forward!

If you are in rush... maybe postpone the transition to after that project or do it with a 2nd computer.