That's basically just piracy, and my feelings are that while sometimes it's ethical*, a lot of musical artists have made a good faith attempt to allow you to acquire it in a legal, DRM-free format at a reasonable price, meaning in a lot of cases it's not ethical, especiallyf with streaming basically eliminating record sale revenue and tour profit margins getting thinner and thinner.1
When I want to pirate, I would at least do it right; why extract lossy audio from YouTube with yt-dlp when you can easily get a lossless FLAC on SoulSeek or another peer-to-peer network?
*: if the media isn't easily legally accessible, if it's stuck under a bad corporation, and fair use like making an FMV. I think it's much more ethical to pirate film and television, as if you pay for a film (whether a subscription or a Blu-Ray), it's often just going to go to some ultra-rick executive who had nothing to do with the talented people who worked on the film. Also, DRM makes streaming an inferior experience to just opening a video file. Music is a completely different game, especially with the proliferation of indie labels and self-publishing.
1: Of course, if the artist is some multi-millionaire or billionaire artist, then go ahead.
Honestly, while I still use Apple Music for some things (I don't like Apple, but I'm unfortunately stuck on it right now), I'm a big fan of building up a collection of digital media files bought either directly from artists or ripped from the CD collection I'm building. I usually go for FLAC, though less for its compression and more for its superior metadata support compared to WAVs.
For discovering new music, Bandcamp allows you to check out some songs; otherwise, check it out on YouTube or something and buy it directly from the artist later.
Like others have said, Bandcamp might not have everyone, but they do have a lot of indie artists and even some bigger ones. Some artists that don't have everything on Bandcamp might have their own store you can buy from.
Chromium Embedded Framework literally describes itself as follows on its Git repos: "Chromium Embedded Framework (CEF). A simple framework for embedding Chromium-based browsers in other applications."
The Spotify "app" is mostly just web app code running on top of a single page Chromium instance, meaning for the most part, it isn't truly native.
True. I just think it's a few years too early; armel is dying, but I don't think it's 32-bit x86 level dead. I feel like 2030 would have been a better year. If they really found the user base was that small, though, then I guess that's less for Debian to maintain.
I like to imagine some weird historian who insisted on pen accidentally flipped the '9' in '2191', and that error just happened to end up in the Enterprise D's historical database; the holodeck just went along with the error, and Riker was none the wiser, having gotten a C- in Early Federation History at the Academy and having frequently gone to the bathroom "for legitimate reasons" during his high school Earth history class. It was only in mid-2380 that he finally discovered his misconception.
Although it'd still be a bit dismal that trip only lived to 70.
MIPS I get, but armel feels a little weird; I’d wager there’s more production users of Debian on armel than RV64 - not a huge use case, but one that merits a bit more consideration.
I think ~2030 would have been a more realistic date, since most of the last devices with ARMv6 would be about 20 years old by then.
Not necessarily. In the case of this specific GPU, both 12 and 13 support that model quite well. I can’t tell if Trixie supported RDNA4 out of box, but if it doesn’t, I’m sure Backports does just fine.
Can we pulp the Worfs down into more of a Worf slurry and fill the Enterprise with that? We can give each of them a warrior's death first if we need to.
My mom would be lass lax in making do our homework if we watched whatever Trek she was watching; I was drawing pictures of Picard by the time I was 10. This was in the 2010s.
Yes, but these are my two thoughts:
*: if the media isn't easily legally accessible, if it's stuck under a bad corporation, and fair use like making an FMV. I think it's much more ethical to pirate film and television, as if you pay for a film (whether a subscription or a Blu-Ray), it's often just going to go to some ultra-rick executive who had nothing to do with the talented people who worked on the film. Also, DRM makes streaming an inferior experience to just opening a video file. Music is a completely different game, especially with the proliferation of indie labels and self-publishing.
1: Of course, if the artist is some multi-millionaire or billionaire artist, then go ahead.