linux

Cope harder, ds is still better than Vista anyways 😎😎

DS is worse actually because they only work on unencrypted or WEP networks which are fundamentally terrible. I just keep a linksys wrt54g around that I plug in whenever I want to use my DS.

mostly when the kernel module loaded for the wifi chip on the laptop's kind of shit or the wrong one, but your in denial about it so you try every command line trick to basically redo your whole networking stack.

Eh not really. Even on the most bare-bones system you can do it pretty simply. And a lot of them even do it graphically. But on those that don't:

1. List all nearby access points: iwlist scan (run as root)
2. Edit /etc/wpa_supplicant.conf with the most basic bits of information given by the scanning command.

For instance:

network={
    ssid="AP_NAME"
    key_mgmt=WPA-PSK
    psk="passwordgoeshere"
}

That's it; you're done.

That's assuming an atheros 9k or some other firmware-free card of course, drivers/firmware can be their own bundle of fun otherwise - but that's the manufacturer's fault for not licensing their firmware better, and not some inherent flaw in the operating system.

Edit: oh, i forgot you guys are afraid of text editors, my mistake

How the fuck I dual boot, I need help

he took the retard pills

Nerd

"I use Linux as my operating system," I state proudly to the unkempt, bearded man. He swivels around in his desk chair with a devilish gleam in his eyes, ready to mansplain with extreme precision. "Actually", he says with a grin, "Linux is just the kernel. You use GNU+Linux!' I don't miss a beat and reply with a smirk, "I use Alpine, a distro that doesn't include the GNU Coreutils, or any other GNU code. It's Linux, but it's not GNU+Linux." The smile quickly drops from the man's face. His body begins convulsing and he foams at the mouth and drops to the floor with a sickly thud. As he writhes around he screams "I-IT WAS COMPILED WITH GCC! THAT MEANS IT'S STILL GNU!" Coolly, I reply "If windows were compiled with GCC, would that make it GNU?" I interrupt his response with "-and work is being made on the kernel to make it more compiler-agnostic. Even if you were correct, you won't be for long." With a sickly wheeze, the last of the man's life is ejected from his body. He lies on the floor, cold and limp. I've womansplained him to death.

Uh actually I’m using Alpine which doesn’t have GNU, so calling it Linux is perfectly correct

Take this libtard 😎😎

what is GNU and why does it sound like its laggy

Shut up nerd

In the wise words of Homer Simpson: NEEEEERRRRRRD!!!!!!!

What Linux does to a mf

ahh the sacred copypasta

No, Richard, it's 'Linux', not 'GNU/Linux'. The most important contributions that the FSF made to Linux were the creation of the GPL and the GCC compiler. Those are fine and inspired products. GCC is a monumental achievement and has earned you, RMS, and the Free Software Foundation countless kudos and much appreciation. Following are some reasons for you to mull over, including some already answered in your FAQ. One guy, Linus Torvalds, used GCC to make his operating system (yes, Linux is an OS -- more on this later). He named it 'Linux' with a little help from his friends. Why doesn't he call it GNU/Linux? Because he wrote it, with more help from his friends, not you. You named your stuff, I named my stuff -- including the software I wrote using GCC -- and Linus named his stuff. The proper name is Linux because Linus Torvalds says so. Linus has spoken. Accept his authority. To do otherwise is to become a nag. You don't want to be known as a nag, do you? (An operating system) != (a distribution). Linux is an operating system. By my definition, an operating system is that software which provides and limits access to hardware resources on a computer. That definition applies whereever you see Linux in use. However, Linux is usually distributed with a collection of utilities and applications to make it easily configurable as a desktop system, a server, a development box, or a graphics workstation, or whatever the user needs. In such a configuration, we have a Linux (based) distribution. Therein lies your strongest argument for the unwieldy title 'GNU/Linux' (when said bundled software is largely from the FSF). Go bug the distribution makers on that one. Take your beef to Red Hat, Mandrake, and Slackware. At least there you have an argument. Linux alone is an operating system that can be used in various applications without any GNU software whatsoever. Embedded applications come to mind as an obvious example. Next, even if we limit the GNU/Linux title to the GNU-based Linux distributions, we run into another obvious problem. XFree86 may well be more important to a particular Linux installation than the sum of all the GNU contributions. More properly, shouldn't the distribution be called XFree86/Linux? Or, at a minimum, XFree86/GNU/Linux? Of course, it would be rather arbitrary to draw the line there when many other fine contributions go unlisted. Yes, I know you've heard this one before. Get used to it. You'll keep hearing it until you can cleanly counter it. You seem to like the lines-of-code metric. There are many lines of GNU code in a typical Linux distribution. You seem to suggest that (more LOC) == (more important). However, I submit to you that raw LOC numbers do not directly correlate with importance. I would suggest that clock cycles spent on code is a better metric. For example, if my system spends 90% of its time executing XFree86 code, XFree86 is probably the single most important collection of code on my system. Even if I loaded ten times as many lines of useless bloatware on my system and I never excuted that bloatware, it certainly isn't more important code than XFree86. Obviously, this metric isn't perfect either, but LOC really, really sucks. Please refrain from using it ever again in supporting any argument. Last, I'd like to point out that we Linux and GNU users shouldn't be fighting among ourselves over naming other people's software. But what the heck, I'm in a bad mood now. I think I'm feeling sufficiently obnoxious to make the point that GCC is so very famous and, yes, so very useful only because Linux was developed. In a show of proper respect and gratitude, shouldn't you and everyone refer to GCC as 'the Linux compiler'? Or at least, 'Linux GCC'? Seriously, where would your masterpiece be without Linux? Languishing with the HURD? If there is a moral buried in this rant, maybe it is this: Be grateful for your abilities and your incredible success and your considerable fame. Continue to use that success and fame for good, not evil. Also, be especially grateful for Linux' huge contribution to that success. You, RMS, the Free Software Foundation, and GNU software have reached their current high profiles largely on the back of Linux. You have changed the world. Now, go forth and don't be a nag. Thanks for listening.

Cum

clearly you don't use arch btw 😏

nerd

"We" - speak for yourself; I don't use network-manager or wicd for instance. It is nice to have them as an option though.

I have a script that just automatically connects to any of the AP's I've listed in a file that are in range. But that's because I'm an engineering guy and have some esoteric network configuration stuff on my LAN.

For the average user, though, yeah, even on linux desktops there's an icon

what are you even talking about

it kinda do be like that, tho it also kinda don't be like that; it depends

It's ok, I stole it from twitter too.

u/savevideo