balsoft

Yeah, true, but it certainly would add a lot of economic pressure on that industry.

Eh, I would say just ban all paid advertisements like ones you're describing. Want to advertise your product? Send it over to some state-run hub, which then randomly distributes it to professional reviewers. They then publish their findings, and if your product is good and people are looking for your product category, they will find you.

Get rid of stupid ads where the only reason they are shown to you is because someone is paid to stuff it in your face. Ads should be something you actively seek out, not something being shoved in your face.

Banning "marketing" in general is impossible. In order for humans to survive, we need to acquire means of sustenance. With social division of labor, you cannot acquire all the means of sustenance you need by yourself or within your immediate community. As such, a market is necessary to exchange commodities, including means of sustenance and means of production, and the mere act of bringing a commodity to a market is, by definition, marketing.

Banning advertising in general is more possible, but probably a bad idea. Imagine you want to buy bread. How would you go about that? Look for a "bakery" sign? Whoops, that's advertising, can't have that. Your best bet then is, like, going into every single open door on the street until you find a bakery, which doesn't sound good at all.

What we should do is regulate advertising down to its minimum necessary function, which is helping people find what they are already looking for, plus maybe PSA type of ads (e.g. reminding you to get vaccinated and stuff). So yeah, most modern ads should be banned, but some should be kept because there is some actual use in them.

Certain groups will lobby really hard to make it illegal and punishable.

At the point of first contact IRL, I avoid mentioning anything even vaguely inflammatory: that I'm an immigrant (that one is hard to hide because my pronunciation of the local language is still quite terrible), vegan, atheist, hold anarchist, marxist, and generally anti-capitalist views. If the relationship lasts longer than just a single contact, as I build up trust and goodwill I slowly start seeping out that info, usually in the order that I listed it in.

How about this:

1. Add ability to make custom "servers" (which can be just rooms on your proprietary server) with no anti-cheat at all, just fool around with your friends and do whatever you want, mods/hacks/cheats/etc.
2. At least for casual play modes, make protocols that are less reliant on clients to do the right thing and instead only tell the clients more or less what the player should know already. This might leave some room for sweaty tryhard cheaters to consistently beat other people, but in a casual game which is mostly just for fun this doesn't really matter.

There may be some places where a protocol-level solution is not feasible. In that case yeah, require your anti-cheat, but only for competitive game modes. I wouldn't even be pissed if they didn't allow it to run on Linux, Linux makes it easy to do whatever the fuck you want with your computer and so a determined cheater will find a way to cheat. It sucks, but I feel like a lot of people don't really care that much about sweaty competitive game modes anyway. Just give me a way to fool around with friends, it's not that serious FFS.

Good luck getting a job with tattoos and dyed hair. All people are judgemental, but people with any power are judgemental as fuck.

Capitalism is making it not fun. It hadn't been fun for an average person before capitalism. Feudalism was worse on many levels.

However, the next mode of production will inevitably be better than this. If human civilization survives, that is.

For context, I'm using NixOS, not Arch, but it's a similar enough idea. I have a tiling/tabbed WM configured just the way I like it, and a window switcher thingy, and it makes juggling hundreds of windows really easy and quick. Combined with a terminal-based editor, a custom setup for my shell, and direnv for easy environment switching, I can be switching between a dozen different projects within a single day (sadly a requirement for my work right now).

Whenever I look at how my colleagues with KDE/Gnome are managing their workflows, it makes me appreciate the work I put into my setup a lot.

Also, I have a whole bunch of shell aliases and scripts for tasks I do often.

Sure, you can configure any distro to do that, but things like Ubuntu or Fedora would get in the way. At some point, when you want to choose (or even write) every component of the system and configure it yourself, it's easier to just build from scratch rather than start with a lot of pre-configured software and remove parts.

My desktop runs nixos, but will be transfered to arch next rebuild.

That's interesting; any particular reason? I went the other way around (Arch for multiple years -> Gentoo for a year or so -> NixOS for over a decade now), and never looked back.

I just see this as a possible boon for Linux ARM laptops, but then again I'm a glass half full kinda guy (not like this).

Is it shown that there are significant performance benefits to installing daemons and utilities à la carte?

No, not really.

Is it because arch users are enthusiasts that enjoy trying to optimize their system?

This is IMHO the most important aspect. The thing they're trying to optimize isn't performance, though, it's more "usability", i.e. making the system work for you. When you get down to it and understand all the components of the OS, and all the moving parts within, you can set it up however you prefer and then combine them in novel ways to solve your tasks more quickly.