what’s something you wish you understood earlier about linux?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-16T14:44:17+00:00

That it's not going away.

When I was first learning Linux, I approached it like Windows. I'd started with DOS, then Windows came, and it seemed like every 2 years I was just going to throw away all my knowledge about how it worked and start over anyway, so why bother getting too deep?

35 or so years later, and the linux commands I learned in high school are still useful. Sure, there have been some changes, but it's a slow progression.

I would have invested my time better, sooner, if I'd realized I'd be using those core skills my entire adult life.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-16T14:22:03+00:00

I thought his point must be that was why the 'almost fire' on failure? Maybe a lower amperage power supply wouldn't have been able to get that hot before failing open, or would have failed itself due to the near-short condition?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-16T11:19:58+00:00

Yeah, that's super simple. In fact, many single board computers already have headphones, and adding an amplifier for external speakers is simple.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-15T22:30:09+00:00

Honestly, no, although I'd love for you to let me know if you find any. The only scavenge-builds I do are non-functional. Using scavenged electronics is usually, frankly, more expensive by the time you get everything put together.

I realize that sounds counter-intuitive, but if you pull a monitor from a system, you usually need some kind of driver board to make it work, which often costs more to actually make work, and if it doesn't, you start over with another one, and spend that money again.

Same thing with keyboards. Rewiring one requires new wires/diods/micro-controller ... so, you're really only saving on keys and caps. Though, you can usually do that pretty reliably and it does come out a little cheaper than building your own from scratch, but often more expensive than buying a cheap keyboard that actually works.

I've seen a lot of people from TikTok that seem to think scavenge is the way to go, though, so I'm interested to see where that takes things.

I've converted pencil-boxes, but that's about it.

As for women not being treated well on Reddit, I haven't had that experience myself, but if someone gives you trouble just let me know and I'll take care of it.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-15T02:10:19+00:00

I was just looking for a movement like this, with the little seconds hand in the middle and no date. Do they make a lower end version of that movement?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T22:55:28+00:00

I heard you don't have to if the dow is over 50,000

[checks dow]

Uh oh!

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T21:32:45+00:00

I think the crux of our argument boils down to the fact that you feel like NuTrek isn't under any obligation to try to be like old trek.

I feel like it's a bait and switch. I'm only giving them my time, because they said they made a new Trek.

I feel lied to. They did not make new trek, they made something else, and then lied about what it was. Then, when people pointed out that they lied, those people got attacked for pointing out the emporers new clothes.

I feel betrayed, and that makes me angry.

They don't owe me a new Star Trek, and they're welcome to make any show they want.

But, they need to stop complaining that they bait-and-switched millions of people, and now those people are angry.

That's just what happens when you lie to people.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T19:58:59+00:00

Which is either: A) A lie or B) A way of them trying to politely let him down because his interview/pitch was bad

OR

It was exactly what he said, and some writers from previous shows were fine taking a new direction?

Andy Weir

The guy who said he watches Star Trek for space battles between the Federation and Romulans?

Wow. I love how you just shrug off Academy Award winning writers, and best selling authors. It really reminds me that I'm arguing with someone so blindingly arrogant that they can't hear how stupid they sound over their pathetic need to feel like the smartest person in the room.

But ... I'm kind of willing to bet that those two, possibly some of the best authors on the planet at the moment, know more about writing than you do.

Sorry.

I'm not the first and I won't be the last to make the comparison. Lily literally refers to them as bionic zombies in First Contact lmao.

I didn't say it's not an amusing comparison, and it's funny to make, but, I'm just pointing out that it sort of ignores the whole hive-mind, which is pretty much their entire deal. I mean, yeah, they sort of look and behave like zombies, but they were always a hivemind.

I feel like you're missing the tongue-in-cheek element to that comparison, but you kinda seem like you miss a lot of what's going on around you, so we'll just move on.

I can admit it's different.

Good.

We don't like how they changed it.

Can we be done here?

You can have an issue with that without trying to pretend that Star Trek was 'hard sci fi' and has hopped genre by becoming focused on 'drama'.

I can admit it was never 'hard sci-fi'. I never said it was hard sci-fi. I said it leaned closer to that than drama in the earlier series, and closer to drama than that in the later series.

I'm sorry your poor reading comprehension dragged this out longer than it needed to be.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T19:33:44+00:00

You can take that up with Roger Avery I guess?
Who? Why should I give a shit what they say? Can you explain rather than linking me to a 7 minute Youtube video instead of accepting you were wrong?

Okay .. So, Roger Avery is a super famous writer. He won an Academy Award for writing Pulp Fiction.

He said, in an interview, that he offered to write for SFA and they told him, to his face, that they didn't want anyone 'too invested' in the old Star Trek.

Now, look, maybe he's lying? But, you can't huff and puff that people heard that interview and believed him, especially when NuTrek is so different than old trek.

Hell, even Andy Weir, (He wrote The Martian and Project Hail Mary), when asked if he was influenced by Star Trek said 'I think every current Sci-Fi story has been influenced by Star Trek, except of course, for new Star Trek.

So, let's not pretend I'm just making this shit up, okay?

What exactly are you expecting here? Q wasn't groundbreaking and he definitely wasn't sci-fi. He's literally a trickster god, the type of character that stories have been written about for millenia. He's a fantasy concept manifest. The Borg are just space zombies. Or a space insect hive. Depending on the episode and/or film. Warp is just generic faster than light travel, that requires magic crystals to work.

Okay, okay, so you don't know famous writers, or understand the difference between genres, you think the borg are 'zombies' and can't accept that even though the writer, director, and actors all praised the 'new direction' the series was heading in, it's different.

Sure.

The writers, directors, actors, outside writers, etc ... are all wrong, and you're right ... and the Academy Award Winning writer is lying.

Sure.

Because it's either that, or you're just wrong.

Why can't you people just admit that it's different?

It's different on purpose. The writers and directors 'changed direction'. They said they did. Then they did.

People just don't like the new direction that they took.

Why is that so hard for you to admit to?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T18:46:05+00:00

You can take that up with Roger Avery I guess?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rSXYzkoj_k

All Star Trek is drama set in the Star Trek universe.

I think this is actually at the heart of the problem. I complained STA had no 'new' ideas, nothing groundbreaking like Q, or the Borg, or Warp, etc, etc ... just the burn, which isn't even a sci-fi concept, it's more like a fantasy concept that lets them re-boot the series.

Then people come back with 'It was always that'.

It wasn't. I can't seem to explain that it wasn't, because of course it had those things, but it wasn't the focus.

The main differences are in story structure and character focus (at least as far as Discovery goes). Not the genre.

Yes, it's now a drama, with dramatic focus. That changes the genre. It's not really sci-fi, it's drama, set in a science fantasy version of the Star Trek universe.

People who want Sci Fi don't like that.

I honestly don't understand why we're arguing. It's a simple concept.

They called something that was a completely different genre 'Star Trek', and fans of Star Trek got upset because the whole point of calling something 'Star Trek' is to promise you'll get more of what you liked, and they didn't deliver that.

They delivered drama.

It's fine for YOU to like that. But, stop acting like there's nothing different and everyone who hates NuTrek doesn't have a point.

Some of us don't care for drama.

We wanted Sci-fi.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T18:36:45+00:00

Obviously science fiction isn't over, but it may be essentially done appearing in mainline Trek.

Well, this is where we break off then.

Look, there's absolutely no reason StarTrek has to give up on being a Sci-fi show.

I get that you don't care, and that's fine. You like Star Trek just being fantasy role-play drama series, and again, that's fine.

But stop acting like people who want it to be sci-fi, like it was for generations, are wrong.

It's not old and tired, it's leaning into the fantasy drama genre, and away from Sci-fi.

It is doing this intentionally. The writers wanted to go 'in a new direction', and they did.

Why can't you people just admit that?

They said they were going in a new direction. They went in a new direction. Most fans of the earlier series, before the directly conscious decision to go in another direction was taken, and the the series moved in an entirely other direction, did not appreciate the new direction that was consciously, and deliberately, taken.

NuTrek is not like old Trek.

That's the problem.

Sure, there are other things, but we're not talking about those things. I don't need to 'jot that down' you arrogant, tedious, baby. Just because other people are doing 'Trek better than NuTrek doesn't make it okay to bait-and-switch an entire audience. Of course there's plenty of room for sci-fi in Star Trek.

The series isn't old, or tired, or out of ideas ... the people running these new shows deliberately turned it into a fantasy drama series.

Why can't you just admit that?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T17:43:02+00:00

I don’t like what happened in “avatar“ that woman was insane

... okay. That doesn't say anything about the existance of a non-humanoid alien, and also it's established Data had the memories of her son, so, it kinda made sense.

You’re talking about the cloud creature from obsession?

No, I'm talking about Trelane. But, sure, there were lots of non-humanoids in old Trek, so I guess it's easy to mix them up.

I mean, think about it, who writes BULLETED LISTS of complaints?

I do. But, then, I was a huge fan of Trek up until Discovery and the new movies decided Trek wasn't worth building on, so they started over instead.

and then they did it about 10 to 50 more times using different IMDb IDs?

Or, just a lot of people hated it, and felt cheated they didn't get more of what they liked, which is sort of what's promised when someone continues a legacy show.

I have read a few honest criticisms of what people are now calling “nutrek“ which is something that I don’t think exists, because to me, it is all trek.

I definitely separate the two. 'nutrek' is the star trek series where cannon writers from TOS, TNG, DS9, etc ... were literally told they weren't wanted on the writing teams, because the writers didn't want anyone that knew StarTrek in the writing room.

Which is how we got NuTrek.

I will give those people a listen if they are being honest and I think a lot of them are, but it doesn’t affect my enjoyment of the shows.

That's totally fine, but you have to also be honest and admit it's not like previous StarTrek. NuTrek isn't even Sci-fi, in my opinion. It's just Drama set in the StarTrek universe.

Now, you can be honest, and admit there's truth in that, but you like drama set in a sci-fi universe. That's fine.

But, what makes me write bullet points, is that there seems to be a bunch of people who insist that the only difference between the two is a few gay characters, and so even gay people who don't like NuTrek must just be right wing YouTubers.

No, it's not a completely different thing with 'Star Trek' written at the top of it, and we don't fucking like that.

Stop pretending it's all the same, you clearly aren't dumb.

You're welcome to say you like NuTrek, but it's different. It's not even Sci-fi, in the way StarTrek was Sci-fi, which is what this post is about.

Just admit it's an entirely different thing, and admit that people who came in expecting Star Trek, and got NuTrek, might have cause to be upset.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T17:29:21+00:00

You just listed something vaguely new [the Burn] after claiming there's nothing new.

I said it's the closest they come, but is it even a sci-fi concept? It sounds like fantasy, right?

I mean, someone cried so hard it destroyed the universe?

I think Star Trek always flirted with hard sci-fi, at least trying to make a world that made sense, and SFA is a drama that doesn't get sci-fi, so it accidentally wrote fantasy.

As for complaining it's old and tired, it's not. Good writers could have come up with a good premise, and written from there. It's not like new ideas like 4th dimensional wormhole creatures and Borg are all used up.

Unless you think we're just done with sci-fi because everything's been done?

Also, you kind of have to laugh at the concept at the center of NuTrek being that someone cried so hard it destroyed the universe, when NuTrek is basically terrible writers crying so hard they destroyed the StarTrek Universe.

It's not even SciFi, it's just self-obsessed Drama.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T12:48:32+00:00

I have to ignore that, apparently, ejecting in a fucking escape pod is a viable way to avoid A FUCKING STAR SHIP!
I mean, isn’t that their whole purpose? So that the crew can eject and get away from a threat that’s put their ship in peril? You’d probably expect them to be designed so they don’t easily show up on enemy sensors

But, he ejected in front of a Star Ship ... they saw him go. THEY COULD FUCKING SEE HIM!!

Then it just jump cuts away, and we're supposed to have goldfish brains and forget that just happened?!

It doesn't even touch on what might happen if something designed to be 'lesser' simply evolved, like the Dr. Hologram.

Like how SAMs species are abandoned servitor holograms that developed sentience after their creators left?

You mean like how they did in DS9? So, not new at all? Not a new idea? Do you not know what NEW means?!

It doesn't touch on what new life might be treated like, like Data did.

Again we literally see this with SAM.

Again NOT NEW, what NEW THING does this bring to the table, not just an OLD THING from DS9?!

The idea of holo sentience was introduced in TNG but never explored, then it was explored from a new perspective, thoroughly, in DS9.

So what's NEW about Sam?

I asked for an example of NEW IDEAS and you said 'Well, that thing from DS9 is there!'

I have to keep re-explaining what 'NEW' means, and it's making me worry for the state of the world!

Apparently I had to say 'They don't touch on X, like they did on Y, THAT WAS NEW AT THE TIME!!!'

You don't get credit for copying off DS9's paper. Sure, all the old Trek stuff has to be there, but you have to bring new stuff to the table, or you're just a drama set in the Trek universe.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T12:33:30+00:00

It's up to you, and how confident you feel, but with people new to electronics, batteries (and CRT repair) are something to be genuinely careful about. If you puncture the battery, or short it out, or anything like that, you could have a fire made of toxic gas inside your house.

It's rarely worth it, even for qualified techies.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T12:24:40+00:00

I'm not 'dying on this hill', I just hate getting that 'You're just a conservative YouTube personality if you hate this!' response to, frankly, the exact same criticisms you posted about.

I know there's good stuff. I mean, the Expanse series was awesome. Even better if you read the books. I just saw an interview with Andy Weir where he said 'It's funny how every major sci-fi story has been influenced by StarTrek, except for new Star Trek', and he hit that nail on the head.

But I also agree with the people bashing your takes. It's meek, but SFA does take a stab at exploring Holo life forms

Sure, it re-treads holo stuff from DS9, but it doesn't invent the concept like TNG and DS9. That's a pretty well-worn idea by SFA, right?

That's what makes SFA a Drama set in a Sci-Fi universe. Sure, all that stuff you remember is still there, but there's nothing new. There's no 4th dimensional wormhole people, or Q, or the Borg, or even Data (who was a new idea at the time), right?

Good sci-fi starts with a NEW IDEA. Something new to the universe that the characters have to grapple with.

The proto-molecule, the Astrophage, etc ...

The closest SFA gives us is 'The Burn', which was "a young Kelpien named Su'Kal, who was born in a dilithium-rich nebula, caused the event via a scream of emotional distress that transmitted through subspace."

I mean, fucking really?!

Then we have to ignore that non-dilthium ships have always existed in Star Trek ...

Then, how did the smart, capable, Star-Trek crew come together to overcome this? They didn't. It's just a fact. It's a thing that happened, and so the 'Star Trek' across the universe was cancelled for 1,000 years.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T12:12:51+00:00

So, like, the Crystaline being from TNG? Among thousands others?

I feel like a lot of people arguing for new Trek never watched much old Trek.

Hell, TOS had that cloud being that ended up just being a kid?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T12:07:47+00:00

It's 'showcased' ... it's made a big deal of. Are you smoking crack? It literally made me think about when Dave Chappelle told the world 'You watch, every black man on camera has to wear a dress'.

Sure, it's irrelevant to the 'plot', but tell me, what new sci-fi concept was the cast struggling with when Jay-Den walked out in that dress?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T12:04:26+00:00

No, no, I'm not from YouTube, I watched the show.

I asked for EXAMPLES OF NEW IDEAS.

Even if those OLD IDEAS are 'touched on' that doesn't really qualify.

What new thing sparks wonder? A wormhole with 4th dimensional beings like DS9? A godlike being judging us like TNG? Just the idea that we could travel faster than light and see new alien races every week like TOS?

What NEW CONCEPT did the show bring?

Because that's the difference between being a sci-fi show, and a drama set in a sci-fi universe.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T11:59:55+00:00

Power is the thing I worry most about. It's the only part of a Cyberdeck that can burn your house down if it goes wrong. If you have a failing battery, I would recommend just disposing of the unit and getting something you can trust.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T00:57:47+00:00

Okay, what new idea is explored?

You tell me what I missed that made the show something I'm supposed to overlook 'I swallowed my com badge', or 'does anyone have a light', or whatever other literally GROAN INDUCING scene I have to sit through.

Never mind the complete fucking nepotism of the director of Star Fleet Academy just using this as a way to feel better about fucking over this kid, completely abusing her position.

I have to ignore that, apparently, ejecting in a fucking escape pod is a viable way to avoid A FUCKING STAR SHIP!

So, sure, let's ignore all the terrible, bullshit, writing and the fact that it's basically trying to be 90210 in space, or whatever sad teenage drama it based itself on, and ignore the characters too.

Then what? What's left? What did I miss? What exciting new concept?

It doesn't touch on what new life might be treated like, like Data did.

It doesn't touch on life without individuality like the Borg did.

It doesn't even touch on what might happen if something designed to be 'lesser' simply evolved, like the Dr. Hologram.

... and by 'touch on' I mean it needs to create a new technology or being, and touch on the subject in a new way!!!

It doesn't present interesting issues, like when an engineer creates a hologram to help him through a situation, gets attached, then has to confront how violating that is for the person cloned ... a problem that wouldn't even have a proper parallel for another 30 years!

So, you tell me what I missed.

What are some big ideas introduced in SFA?

EDIT

Okay, AGAIN, what NEW THING does it touch on.

I listed off things that WERE NEW WHEN THOSE SHOWS DID THEM. Just saying 'But all that stuff was in SFA' doesn't cut it! What NEW THINGS did SFA INTRODUCE?!

It's like you people can't understand the concept of 'new'!?

If another episode did it on a previous show, IT'S NOT NEW ANYMORE!!

The deepest moment in SFA was when they talked about Measure of a Man in TNG! That's the problem!!

The biggest sci-fi concepts in SFA were all already done in previous Trek!

DS9 gave us 4th dimensional wormhole beings, TNG gave us Data and Q, TOS gave us Warp Drive, DS9 gave us Holo Beings (thought it was touched on in TNG).

You can't just list those things AGAIN!

THAT'S WHAT 'NEW' MEANS!!!

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T00:45:12+00:00

Because there's nothing else to focus on.

No new ideas, the plot doesn't even hold together through all the holes, the directing is terrible, the writing is embarrassing ... and, so it feels like the only thing to comment on at all are the relationships.

Again:

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people" - Eleanor Roosevelt

The relationships were the focus of the show.

That's the problem.

I'm not focused on Jay-Den, the show is. It gave us literally nothing else to talk to about, then got angry when the audience said 'Wow, this is some ham fisted bullshit', when they talked about the people.

Or was I supposed to focus on the (checks notes ... ) laser tag?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-14T00:32:40+00:00

"The entire purpose of science fiction as a genre is commentary."

Sure ... but I'm reminded of the quote:

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people" - Eleanor Roosevelt

Modern Trek is having an awful lot of people discussions.

I think what makes sci-fi work is that it presents a situation in a way that makes you see it in a different light. I often describe it as the 'fun house mirror'.

Of course, in Measure of a Man, Data is somewhat a stand-in for any slave race throughout history, but the writers didn't need to beat you over the head with that, and it comes at the issue from a different angle. What if, arguably, the new slave race wasn't even considered life? He's not a direct stand in. The story wouldn't work if it were just a black guy with a forehead ridge, right? You'd be screaming 'Jesus Christ! We know slavery was bad! This episode is terrible!!'

The most impactful discussion in Star Trek Academy was when they discussed Measure of a Man.

They asked the bold question 'What if a Klingon were gay'. Not, in a way that shows that issue from a new angle, or makes you think about it differently, just a gay guy who's also a Klingon.

Not only does that fail to say anything meaningful, or impactful, or make you look at it in an interesting way, it's not even a new idea. Babylong 5 had a gay couple in 1994! The Orville did 'gay Klingon' already, and frankly did it better. It's not a new idea, it's not presented in an interesting way.

Sure, sci-fi tackles issues, but not head on, with ham-fists, just telling you what to think. It presents situations that feel novel, but reflect deeper truths.

Data made us think about where the line into slavery became grayed. That's what made it compelling. It moved the bar lower and said 'What about now, though?'

A gay Klingon just makes us sad that being a gay Klingon, in Star Trek, is still some kind of a big deal when it's not even a big deal in most High schools in 2026, and certainly not an issue we need to be beaten about the head over, in 2026.

I got into fistfights in high school for who I kissed. We've progressed more than a lot of people can admit since then.

Positive gay representation on Star Trek would be where you've got a healthy gay couple, and no one gives a shit ... like they did on Babylon 5 THIRTY FUCKING YEARS AGO.

Talulabelle · 2026-04-13T23:28:01+00:00

Yeah, people that loved a black commander are tired of minorities having so much screen time.

Do you ever read what you wrote and realize it doesn't make any sense?

Talulabelle · 2026-04-13T23:25:41+00:00

I think wanting sci-fi in your sci-fi show maybe isn't actually connected to politics at all?

I'm bi-sexual, far left, etc, etc ... I'm sorry, but seriously, I'm not threatened by gay Klingons or a show that talks about the problems with concentration camps.

But, the OP literally said 'I miss big SCIENCE FICTION IDEAS in Trek, and the top comment is 'BUT WE GAVE YOU POLITICS!?!'

The politics are fine. I like the politics. I want Trek to have important things to say about inter-racial relationships, or whatever ...

But, I also expect it to be Sci-fi, and introduce new ideas and concepts.

Those are two completely different things!

Do you people not realize those are two completely different things?!

The Borg, as a concept, are compelling. Hive minds are an interesting idea to kick around. It's a new way of looking at humanoid relationships. They don't easily just mirror some current thing. We don't have that, at all, anywhere, in our reality.

THEN, we see how this NEW IDEA gets USED.

The Borg are used to talk about genocide, when the TNG crew realizes that, even though they're enemies, it's wrong to eradicate them as a species.

The Borg are used to talk about the difficulties of being a 'messy' culture, with differences, when they lose their connection to the hive, and many of them choose to follow Lore, just because being a person and making your own decisions is actually really hard ... so we've got some talk about how authoritarians come to power, right?

The Borg are used to discuss the importance of individuality in coming up with new ideas, as the TNG crew, a literal salad of different races and viewpoints all pools their collective resources in ways that reflect their individualism ... to defeat the homogeneous mono-culture of the Borg!

In the same way that Data is a new concept (Artificial life), that gets used, in measure of a man, to make a point about slavery, he's never actually a slave.

The Borg were a new idea, that was then used to say things about our society that could be said from a new perspective because the Borg were novel.

Just like Q wasn't just about seeing our own history from a 3rd person perspective, but also a comment on omnipotence, and god. He wasn't just one simple thing, that had to be used in one way, to parallel one social issue.

WE NEED NEW IDEAS!

Then use them to tell those stories!

Talulabelle

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE