Pyra debian with systemd?

[rygD]

If the main reason for using it is just to be different, then yes. It's the motivation that counts.

My quotation marks around reasons was to cover things like that. Any reason that you come up with is going to be about how Linux is different than whatever else. I don't think wanting to do something different really makes one a hipster. Do people really show off their OS enough for it to be worth all the trouble? Maybe they just talk about it, in which case TrashyMG was still right. I wish all the hipsters here would go away so that we don't end up with some weird hipster device that tries to be different...

When I first tried Jessie (pre-release) systemd didn't boot and I had no chance of fixing anything because I didn't know how it works (compared to init).

I still get into situations like this after taking 2 classes where we learned systemd. Perhaps if I was hands on with it more I wouldn't be such a grouchy geezer about it.

So my conclusion: it doesn't matter in terms of stability and functionality (after booting).

I am still not convinced, although I may only notice the issues with systemd because they aren't as well known (so they are discussed), not because they are more common. I still see quite a few other issues with it. I guess booting faster might be nice for the Pyra, although I don't need to do that with other computers too often (my Pandora had an uptime of a few weeks before my last update). That feels like one of those examples people talk about with making Linux more like Windows. Why else would an average user need to boot frequently?

Technically conformists within their own subculture, but pioneers and leaders of the latest cultural trends and ideals.

I guess, if the goal is to achieve the highest level of insincere rip-offs and disposability. (How, if they make use of so much great/interesting old and obscure shit? It is an affectation that is only cared about due to how uncommon it is currently. This is not the same as appreciating and truly valuing it.)

I agree with some of the other stuff you said. I had an Apple guy ask me to help him install Linux on his Mac Book several years ago, out of the blue. Luckily I had a disc with me (a group of us were out in the middle of nowhere for a while).

 

[Klumpen]

I had an Apple guy ask me to help him install Linux on his Mac Book several years ago, out of the blue. Luckily I had a disc with me (a group of us were out in the middle of nowhere for a while).

I'll bite.
Why do you carry a Linux disc around?

 

[rygD]

I don't usually. I was the sole IT person out there, our link back to the rest of the world was supposed to be only for official use, so I added it to the ones I had with my stuff for my personal use in case I needed to reinstall. I may have had a few different distros, actually.

I do sometimes carry a USB drive with Linux. I used to carry a really thin and tiny one in my wallet until a piece of it broke off.

 

[Klumpen]

I don't usually. I was the sole IT person out there, our link back to the rest of the world was supposed to be only for official use, so I added it to the ones I had with my stuff for my personal use in case I needed to reinstall. I may have had a few different distros, actually.

I do sometimes carry a USB drive with Linux. I used to carry a really thin and tiny one in my wallet until a piece of it broke off.

...and every time someone has Windows problems and asks for help you draw your magic stick and solve the problem once and for all.

BTW: It's possible to install Linux on MacBooks?

 

[slaeshjag]

Possible? Yes. But Broadcock wifi tends to ruin the experience.

 

[rygD]

...and every time someone has Windows problems and asks for help you draw your magic stick and solve the problem once and for all.

Only for friends and family. This usually isn't an option with work computers, although a handful that I worked with were *nix.

Possible? Yes. But Broadcock wifi tends to ruin the experience.

Good thing we didn't have wifi out there or he would have probably given up right away.

 

[bzar]

My quotation marks around reasons was to cover things like that. Any reason that you come up with is going to be about how Linux is different than whatever else. I don't think wanting to do something different really makes one a hipster. Do people really show off their OS enough for it to be worth all the trouble? Maybe they just talk about it, in which case TrashyMG was still right. I wish all the hipsters here would go away so that we don't end up with some weird hipster device that tries to be different...

There is a difference between using linux because it is different and using it to be different. The former implies it somehow matches better to what you expect and want from it. The latter implies you don't actually care how it works, as long as using it makes you different from others. People are different and want different things. Finding something, even obscure or less used, that matches with what you want is not the issue, it's just pragmatic. When you use something solely for its differentiating social status, the hipster arises.

I may have been unclear earlier, as I only spoke of "using something because it is different", but this should be a more accurate representation of what I meant. I see now it was still ambiguous.

 

[levi]

And - something I didn't expect - systemd boots faster (apparently more parallelism in initializing subsystems).

I know Arch using systemd boots a hell of a lot faster than Debian Squeeze used to on this hardware, but I was never sure whether it was primarily using systemd that let to that speedup, or primarily due to switching to a cut down Arch install.

 

[tigerroast]

First quarter last year I wanted to start using linux and went with Manjaro. It was all fine and worked until some update broke my system. It didn't boot successfully anymore.

While I do like Manjaro, I had an AWFUL memory leak problem with it that was eventually traced down to their build of KDE5 (KaOS, with telemetry off by default, didn't have this issue). I've also had very strange performance issues that wouldn't pop up in similar setups in Arch (probably since Manjaro enables BFQ by default, or something I screwed up playing with MSM).

Very strange bugs in Manjaro just pop up out of nowhere, but I've heard people live and die by the stable XFCE branch. So whatever.

By then I learned about systemd, and although I'm not blaming it for the problem (I still don't know, what the cause was) I have a strong feeling, that it's to blame for blocking actual diagnostics.

Huh?

Am I wrong?

Very. It's quite the opposite; a module of systemd handles diagnostics in such a system. journald in Arch (and presumably Manjaro) is set to persistently store boot log messages, so a simple # journalctl -b -1 would print the log from the previous boot (assuming, of course, Manjaro devs kept this behavior when they forked Arch, which they probably did).

 

[Djoga'Ro]

@tigerroast Bad phrasing on my part I guess. I meant I suspect systemd to be responsible for no one bothering to try to help me tracking down the actual cause. Maybe Manjaro's maintainers don't know to use journald like you do or they were just not interested in discovering the culprit. The latter I don't want to believe, so I must blame systemd.

 

[tigerroast]

I meant I suspect systemd to be responsible for no one bothering to try to help me tracking down the actual cause.

...interesting. Manjaro's community is known to be more accommodating than Arch's, so I'd think that there's be at least one person willing to give you that simple solution (or move you in that direction). Pull that in Arch's BBS, and someone would either link you to the systemd wiki page or tell you some shit like, "You'll probably need assistance in killing yourself. Which you should consider doing btw. Google is your friend, so your should ask him how to tie a noose. Hugs and kisses."

It sucks you couldn't get the help you needed at the time though. Just that bit of knowledge might've helped you resolve the issue.

 

[rygD]

People are different and want different things. Finding something, even obscure or less used, that matches with what you want is not the issue, it's just pragmatic. When you use something solely for its differentiating social status, the hipster arises.

This kinda feels like splitting hairs (not trying to pin that on you, though, just the whole distinction is pointless imo). Say we have 2 people that want to use something different. For the first example we will go with an OS. One wants to see how it is different, what makes it different and how it works while they are using it (for my series of questions later this will be replaced by whatever the variable is, but this is the person with "reasons"). The other doesn't care. Initially both thought "it is time to try a different OS". Most of the time neither thinks about the reason they stuck with it, so how is one a hipster and one not? Or is neither a hipster unless they chose it for social reasons? If the switch was strictly motivated because it is different than what is popular and less harmful to users does that make the person that made the "logical" choice a hipster, especially if they are broadcasting that they are using Linux instead of Windows, and tell everyone why?

Now let's switch to using computers and other things. First, a mechanical typewriter. I really think both will want to use it for a variety of reasons or they wouldn't seek it out and bother with getting it all set up. If they like the aesthetics (look, feel, sound) of using it, and the produced page, are they a hipster? What about wanting to reduce trash and preserve an old machine, or they just like mechanical stuff? Or not needing electricity to use it? What if it is just fun for them? Obviously they can still type up the same thoughts on a computer (edit: and dealing with typos and edits ifs much easier on the computer).

What are the acceptable reasons for using a Pyra or Pandora instead of a more common device? If used when out of the house someone will probably see it, so that social judgment is probably going to be there either way. If you don't use it when out then it seems pointless to get a small handheld pocketable device, but since no one will know they can't be a hipster, right?

One last one that just popped in my head. If you choose a specific car because it is different are you a hipster? Most people that are really into cars like what they like because it stands out in some way, and many customize them.

Maybe you need to roll all these things into the same person with a pattern of such choices. The problem with that is you have always had people that were different/eccentric/weird/freaks. Some subcultures/lifestyles are full of this, and most would not be called hipsters, at least by like minded people, and, in many cases, by outsiders.

So what makes one either a hipster or not based on their opinion about systemd? It looks to me like having any opinion makes one a hipster, or systemd opinions cannot be used to tell if someone is.

I would like to thank @TrashyMG for helping get this discussion started.

I know Arch using systemd boots a hell of a lot faster than Debian Squeeze used to on this hardware, but I was never sure whether it was primarily using systemd that let to that speedup, or primarily due to switching to a cut down Arch install.

This is a question to everyone: how often do you boot your computers?

I even know Windows users that only reboot when required by an update or installing something, so the focus on boot speed seems a bit odd.

 

[bzar]

This kinda feels like splitting hairs (not trying to pin that on you, though, just the whole distinction is pointless imo). Say we have 2 people that want to use something different. For the first example we will go with an OS. One wants to see how it is different, what makes it different and how it works while they are using it (for my series of questions later this will be replaced by whatever the variable is, but this is the person with "reasons"). The other doesn't care. Initially both thought "it is time to try a different OS". Most of the time neither thinks about the reason they stuck with it, so how is one a hipster and one not? Or is neither a hipster unless they chose it for social reasons? If the switch was strictly motivated because it is different than what is popular and less harmful to users does that make the person that made the "logical" choice a hipster, especially if they are broadcasting that they are using Linux instead of Windows, and tell everyone why?

Now let's switch to using computers and other things. First, a mechanical typewriter. I really think both will want to use it for a variety of reasons or they wouldn't seek it out and bother with getting it all set up. If they like the aesthetics (look, feel, sound) of using it, and the produced page, are they a hipster? What about wanting to reduce trash and preserve an old machine, or they just like mechanical stuff? Or not needing electricity to use it? What if it is just fun for them? Obviously they can still type up the same thoughts on a computer (edit: and dealing with typos and edits ifs much easier on the computer).

What are the acceptable reasons for using a Pyra or Pandora instead of a more common device? If used when out of the house someone will probably see it, so that social judgment is probably going to be there either way. If you don't use it when out then it seems pointless to get a small handheld pocketable device, but since no one will know they can't be a hipster, right?

One last one that just popped in my head. If you choose a specific car because it is different are you a hipster? Most people that are really into cars like what they like because it stands out in some way, and many customize them.

Maybe you need to roll all these things into the same person with a pattern of such choices. The problem with that is you have always had people that were different/eccentric/weird/freaks. Some subcultures/lifestyles are full of this, and most would not be called hipsters, at least by like minded people, and, in many cases, by outsiders.

So what makes one either a hipster or not based on their opinion about systemd? It looks to me like having any opinion makes one a hipster, or systemd opinions cannot be used to tell if someone is.

For all these cases, in my opinion, the critical question is: would they still do the same if no one knew about it? If they had no one to tell, no one to feel superior to, no one to claim moral high ground against. A less critical, but still meaningful question is would they do the same if it was mainstream? If they'd do the same choice in isolation I see no hipster angle. For a hipster it's not about the thing they use, it's how using it allows them to act with other people.

For example, in your OS case neither is really a hipster.

Let's define a third person that picks ObscureOS that only renders in black-and-white, supports only PS/2 mice and hasn't been developed since 2004. She uses it not because of its terrible feature set, but because then she can tell people "I use a rare underground OS, you probably haven't heard about it" when asked about which OS she uses. This one is clearly a hipster; let's call her an "eccentric hipster" because she focuses on telling people how different she is. She's relatively harmless, though sometimes annoying.

Let's also define fourth person that uses a somewhat mainstream OS, like debian. He doesn't really have technical opinions at OS level and is relatively happy using a popular-yet-not-most-popular OS. Then an argument breaks out in the community due to a choice made by the distro maintainers. He doesn't really have the technical knowledge to form an informed opinion on the subject, but is drawn to the conflict and heated arguments. He then picks a side, because of course he must, based on which side is in the minority instead of any personally relevant technical reason. He just wants to feel he's fighting the oppressing majority, protecting the underdogs and generally being different. If there was no great conflict he'd still be happily using whatever was spoon-fed to him without issue. If the majority and minority were reversed, he'd be proudly waving the banner for the opposing side. This is also a hipster, and arguably a worse one since his hipstering affects others around him. He's probably muddling a technical conversation with emotional arguments and politics, since he doesn't want to talk about the technical points, because he has no idea about them. He's just making the conflict worse for everyone by making the minority look like his irrational self and the majority face a load of irrelevant or downright false arguments. Let's call him a "counter-culture hipster", because he doesn't just want to be different, but actively fight against the majority no matter what either side stand for.

I want to stress here that I'm not trying to claim any group of people being composed of such "counter-culture hipsters"; just that in many conflicts there are a few of them. If anything, I'm ruling most people in any conflict out as being a hipster here. For both sides, it's important to recognize these individuals and weed them out from making the situation worse. They're simply counterproductive, because their interest is how they can present themselves within the conflict, not its outcome.

This is a question to everyone: how often do you boot your computers?

A few times a day since I dual-boot to windows for some games. I stay on the windows side for the duration of the gaming session, then switch back to linux for doing anything else.

 

[_jr_]

Everybody that has the wrong reasons (as defined by me) is a hipster (or other derogatory term of choice).

Anyway, I don't plan to start lots of services at boot. My (debian testing) desktop is already down to exim (because I'm too lazy to research how to remove the need for an MTA), audio and gettys (I don't see the added value of a display manager). Everything else is already started on demand (most things except network connectivity only a couple of times per year and usually only after checking for security updates first). Therefore a sane service manager is needed, but boot time parallelization doesn't seem an important feature.

Do people really start things like ssh or cups on boot? I'm not brave enough for that. Other family members windows systems are on the same network and have at least twice been part of a bot net in the last year.

 

[Klumpen]

There is a difference between using linux because it is different and using it to be different. The former implies it somehow matches better to what you expect and want from it. The latter implies you don't actually care how it works, as long as using it makes you different from others. People are different and want different things. Finding something, even obscure or less used, that matches with what you want is not the issue, it's just pragmatic. When you use something solely for its differentiating social status, the hipster arises.

I think one of the main reasons for using Linux is being fed up with Microsoft and their practices (same with Apple), not wanting to "understand" your OS.
Since I'm not working with computers in any way and have a lot of completely different stuff to attend to, I'm happy when things "just work" and they even do with Linux more often than with Windows for me these days - my aversion to DRM being another big point.

For all these cases, in my opinion, the critical question is: would they still do the same if no one knew about it? If they had no one to tell, no one to feel superior to, no one to claim moral high ground against. A less critical, but still meaningful question is would they do the same if it was mainstream? If they'd do the same choice in isolation I see no hipster angle. For a hipster it's not about the thing they use, it's how using it allows them to act with other people.

Hipster is mainstream, that's the whole joke, that's what "hip" stands for. It's the rich kid's new-age punk with weird political agendas and more authoritarianism instead of liberalism.
The organisator of my folk session has started setting "anti hetero normative"-rules too now, not noticing that only the agenda driven university students really approve while the rest of the people just do what they want and want less rules anyway.

 

[rygD]

@bzar, I understand your view now, I think. Where do you feel the car enthusiasts fall?

@_jr_, stop being such a hipster.

@Klumpen, wouldn't it be easier to limit the rules to "everyone try to have fun, and don't be an asshole?". I guess that is what the rest of the people you mention go by anyway (give or take the asshole part...I would, at least occasionally, mess with people a little).

 

[ZXDunny]

Let's define a third person that picks ObscureOS that only renders in black-and-white, supports only PS/2 mice and hasn't been developed since 2004. She uses it not because of its terrible feature set, but because then she can tell people "I use a rare underground OS, you probably haven't heard about it" when asked about which OS she uses. This one is clearly a hipster; let's call her an "eccentric hipster" because she focuses on telling people how different she is. She's relatively harmless, though sometimes annoying.

I suspect she's also Vegan, the behaviour is familiar.

D.

 

[Djoga'Ro]

It sucks you couldn't get the help you needed at the time though. Just that bit of knowledge might've helped you resolve the issue.

Oh, I found out about journald and posted my findings - just couldn't surehandedly interpret them. Maybe I didn't pronounce enough that a had only a glimps of an idea about what I'm doing and they thought, I'd get there on my own. Who knows.
BTW, when I learned that they started having binary logs in Linux, I tried to wake myself up - still hurts.

Let's also define fourth person that uses a somewhat mainstream OS, like debian. He doesn't really have technical opinions at OS level and is relatively happy using a popular-yet-not-most-popular OS. Then an argument breaks out in the community due to a choice made by the distro maintainers. He doesn't really have the technical knowledge to form an informed opinion on the subject, but is drawn to the conflict and heated arguments. He then picks a side, because of course he must, based on which side is in the minority instead of any personally relevant technical reason. He just wants to feel he's fighting the oppressing majority, protecting the underdogs and generally being different. If there was no great conflict he'd still be happily using whatever was spoon-fed to him without issue. If the majority and minority were reversed, he'd be proudly waving the banner for the opposing side. This is also a hipster, and arguably a worse one since his hipstering affects others around him. He's probably muddling a technical conversation with emotional arguments and politics, since he doesn't want to talk about the technical points, because he has no idea about them. He's just making the conflict worse for everyone by making the minority look like his irrational self and the majority face a load of irrelevant or downright false arguments. Let's call him a "counter-culture hipster", because he doesn't just want to be different, but actively fight against the majority no matter what either side stand for.

As long as the minority isn't somewhere in the right political spectrum, it could just be punks.
http://lyricstranslate.com/en/rebell-rebell.html
Or are punks hipsters, too?

This is a question to everyone: how often do you boot your computers?

I even know Windows users that only reboot when required by an update or installing something, so the focus on boot speed seems a bit odd.

Twice a day. Why would I leave my computer running for hours, when I'm at work or asleep. And if I wanted to setup a server, I'd get a small box with low power comsumption. Well, besides not senselessly wasting power (I'm not an extremist btw) having to sleep next to the thing is another point.
Since I'm not using telephony over the landline, I even got a Frtiz!Box, that doesn't support it. This way I have one, I can shutdown gracefully, which I do twice a day, too.

 

[Klumpen]

I suspect she's also Vegan, the behaviour is familiar.

D.

...because the choice between operating systems has so much to do with avoiding to create animal sorrow.
Oh I forgot, it's all about being "different", that's why vegans hate it when other people have done it before them already.

 

[bzar]

@bzar, I understand your view now, I think. Where do you feel the car enthusiasts fall?

Yay! Depends on their motivations, I wouldn't stereotype them either way.

As long as the minority isn't somewhere in the right political spectrum, it could just be punks.
http://lyricstranslate.com/en/rebell-rebell.html
Or are punks hipsters, too?

I'd say there can be hipsters among punks. I haven't dug into this, but I'd instinctually position punks about being "against the establishment", not just "being different". It's not about them, as it is with hipsters, but about the rebellion.