Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
askubuntu.com
Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
1–10 of 24 posts
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#2> Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
I honestly don't mind this, it makes sense. Comments aren't for extended discussion, so move them to the place that is, e.g. chat. But, it's really it's quite obnoxious when they subsequently delete the chatroom!
Internet Archive rescued the top comments[1], but you can't click the button to see all of them. Even so, there is some useful context here. User `dobey` points out:
> Setting $PATH for the non-root user would not affect the environment for root where the packages are being installed. It is more likely the binary was copied to a directory which is already in root's $PATH instead.
OP confirms this:
> Just one little side note - I did not edit $PATH, I just symlinked dwarf fortress to /usr/local/bin. Otherwise this seems correct. Well done and thanks much!
An open question for me is whether this was user error on the OP's part, or a fundamental flaw in the design of UNIX and/or apt.
---
1: https://web.archive.org/web/20170818234302/https://askubuntu...
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#3> Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. I honestly don't mind this, it makes sense. Comments aren't for extended discussion, so move them to the place that is, e.g. chat. But, it's really it's quite obnoxious when they subsequently delete the chatroom! Internet Archive rescued the top comments[1], but you can't click the button to see all of them. Even so, there is some u…
StackOverflow seems to have been designed to maximally obnoxious in a lot of ways, so it's right on brand.
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#4> Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. I honestly don't mind this, it makes sense. Comments aren't for extended discussion, so move them to the place that is, e.g. chat. But, it's really it's quite obnoxious when they subsequently delete the chatroom! Internet Archive rescued the top comments[1], but you can't click the button to see all of them. Even so, there is some u…
StackOverflow seems to have been designed to maximally obnoxious in a lot of ways, so it's right on brand.
I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers. Such as TFA!
But the way they delete chatrooms is off brand. If you want to incentivize people to chat in chat instead of in comments, make sure chat is actually usable. That means not deleting chatrooms after a few days!
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
StackOverflow seems to have been designed to maximally obnoxious in a lot of ways, so it's right on brand.
I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers. Such as TFA! But the way they delete chatrooms is off brand. If you want to incentivize people to chat in chat instead of in comments, make sure chat is actually usable. That means not deleting chatrooms after a few days!
> I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers.
There's questions and answers on SE? I thought it was just pop-ups and sidebars?
(I'm being mildly sarcastic, but I think this screenshot speaks for itself on the state of SE: https://i.imgur.com/S8slGeT.png)
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#6Earlier quoted context omitted.
StackOverflow seems to have been designed to maximally obnoxious in a lot of ways, so it's right on brand.
I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers. Such as TFA! But the way they delete chatrooms is off brand. If you want to incentivize people to chat in chat instead of in comments, make sure chat is actually usable. That means not deleting chatrooms after a few days!
Except for that all the good answers are showing their age and there's no realistic mechanism for them to be replaced with newer answers.
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#7Earlier quoted context omitted.
StackOverflow seems to have been designed to maximally obnoxious in a lot of ways, so it's right on brand.
I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers. Such as TFA! But the way they delete chatrooms is off brand. If you want to incentivize people to chat in chat instead of in comments, make sure chat is actually usable. That means not deleting chatrooms after a few days!
Chatrooms are freezed, not deleted, if there's enough content. The only reason why they are deleted is when there are less than 10 messages or 3 participants (don't quote me on that).
Actual rules:
> Rooms will exist indefinitely, so long as there is at least one person actively talking in the room. A room is considered worth retaining if it has more than 15 messages by at least 2 users.
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#8> Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat. I honestly don't mind this, it makes sense. Comments aren't for extended discussion, so move them to the place that is, e.g. chat. But, it's really it's quite obnoxious when they subsequently delete the chatroom! Internet Archive rescued the top comments[1], but you can't click the button to see all of them. Even so, there is some u…
The room still exists and has all the messages https://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/64083/discussion-on-ans...
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers. Such as TFA! But the way they delete chatrooms is off brand. If you want to incentivize people to chat in chat instead of in comments, make sure chat is actually usable. That means not deleting chatrooms after a few days!
Chatrooms are freezed, not deleted, if there's enough content. The only reason why they are deleted is when there are less than 10 messages or 3 participants (don't quote me on that). Actual rules: > Rooms will exist indefinitely, so long as there is at least one person actively talking in the room. A room is considered worth retaining if it has more than 15 messages by at least 2 users.
So did this room get lost in a middleground where there were too many messages for a comment section but too few to retain the chatroom?
That's obviously not a good outcome. Either the threshold for moving comments to chat needs to be moved up, or the threshold for deleting a chatroom needs to be moved down.
Edit: Wait, none of this makes sense! We can tell from the Internet Archive that there were at least 15 comments. So where is the room?
Re: Dwarf Fortress starting during apt-get upgrade
#10Earlier quoted context omitted.
StackOverflow seems to have been designed to maximally obnoxious in a lot of ways, so it's right on brand.
I actually think StackExchange is quite well designed to optimize for good questions and answers. Such as TFA! But the way they delete chatrooms is off brand. If you want to incentivize people to chat in chat instead of in comments, make sure chat is actually usable. That means not deleting chatrooms after a few days!
Same vibes as a the complaints box, emptying into the trash can.