My experience of using AI is it can save you a LOT of work, but you need to supervise it REALLY closely and give it sufficient code context for it to work properly. It only knows what it knows and if it doesn’t know it will make shit up. But if you do use it within its limits it will identify bugs, generate tests, generate a lot of boiler plate and help you be more productive.

Being open source is not a reason to avoid it. However AI does produce slop and unattended it can produce execrable patches which are practically incoherent to anyone used to human coding patterns. So there should be rules about coding style, patch / merge / pull requests that diffs are self evident, concise and obvious. Most AIs will read a guidance file so this stuff can be defined. And if a person uses AI to generate a patch they should review this patch first before daring anyone else to look at it.

#5 is actually true. Install Ubuntu for WSL from the Windows store. WSL is great BTW

This boils down to a Linux using a file system which allows files to be deleted or replaced in the inode table while something has the old file open. So it’s easier (although not simple) to replace packages while other stuff is running. Whereas Windows has to shut everything else down so nothing has the file open to replace it and also fix stragglers during the next reboot.

Stuff like ydotool, wtype exist and presumably there are others for this. Search on automation testing on Wayland and see.

Since it is a niche I’m not surprised if it wasn’t a critical path for Wayland adoption but clearly there are solutions that work for certain compositors and I assume people working on a more robust solution. But allowing one piece of software to sniff or inject input, or capture its content is an obvious security flaw and Wayland devs are right to put it front and centre. If a desktop is to allow those things then it should be through a security model instead of in the absence of one.

Wayland enforces security to stop one process sniffing or injecting input into another. X11 basically has zero security boundaries. So certain things are easier in X11, but then again the price to pay is too much.

So things like virtual mouse positioning, autohotkey, screen capture are harder to do but not insurmountable. It requires protocols that the client / desktop understand and which are fit for purpose. Big desktops like GNOME & KDE Plasma do support xdg-desktop-portal which allows hotkeys to be registered with the desktop, and could potentially be what you need.

The only thing I didn’t like about systemd was the unfamiliarity of the commands. Typing systemctl and a verb and a service and some more arguments feels a bit clunky.

But otherwise it all seems to make sense to me - lots of little services running with least privilege, very simple description of services in unitary files, secure binary logging with proper filtering, proper utilisation of cgroups to reliably kill processes and enforce limits, parallel startup/shutdown etc.

Most of the objections I’ve see to it online seem miss the point and ignore answers which would solve or refute their objections.

It’s like the Amish but with operating systems. Technology has advanced this far but must advance no further.

Systemd and Wayland have become ragebait for some people.

Satellite internet is a last resort. People shouldn’t be using it if they have fibre broadband or 5G options that provide the same speeds. It’s a lifesaver if you’re on a boat, or live off grid, or just a few miles from where the broadband ends. But if it’s anywhere with other people then it’s going to max out with horrible contention. At the point the only option is “moar satellites”.