deliriousn0mad

Thank you, I didn't know about ydotool, I'll get it working on openSuse

That's a great workaround, could you share the command?

How do the Tumbleweed Folks among us deal with this?

We generally don't add many third party repos and we set repository priorities. If I understand this correctly, you are currently using official openSUSE packages and your upgrade is prompting you to upgrade them by changing vendor to this home:wolfi repo. If you want to keep the original packages, you just need to set priorities: in YaST 's "Software Repositories" page for instance, you can select a repo and see what its priority is (99 is the lowest priority, 1 is the highest). You could for instance put the official repos at 95 priority and the wolfi repo at 99. This way, packages will remain set on the official repos even if there are new versions on the other repo.

However, if you have packages that you want to get from the wolfi repo but are also in the official repos, with this method you will be asked to change those packages to the official repos, the inverse situation compared to your issue. You can tell the system to keep those packages from your chosen repo, I do it by choosing a version on the YaST Software page.

I love how the division in Europe vaguely looks like the Protestant Reformation led to different prefix numbers (I know I know, Poland & co don't match)

I had the same annoyance and ended up uninstalling it, I'll look into remapping the up arrow too, I never liked the way ctrl-r works anyway. By the way, do you know how to delete a command from history in atuin? I found a bunch of discussions in development about this and some comments saying the function was added, but never mentioning the shortcut or command to delete

Oh COME ON. Where was this when my laptop died a month ago? I had to replace it asap and the previous kde slimbook was already out of stock. I got a great tuxedo, but this one is the same price and much better specs... I have the worst timing. Great news for everyone else though!

Beta? It isn't experimental, it was an official feature that is no longer supported (even if it still works perfectly).

As I said somewhere else, to get more compact tabs you can go to about:config and search for a setting called browser.tabs.tabMinWidth, I usually change the number to 20 (the default minimum width is like 70) and tabs are allowed to become roughly as narrow as in chrome. And if by "more compact tab bar" you meant how tall tabs are, there's the browser.compactmode.show setting, put it to "true" and then in the Firefox menu under More Tools → Customize Toolbars you can select "compact mode" in the "Density" menu on the bottom, which makes the tab bar and toolbars shorter

This video is criticising Lunduke, it isn't made by him

To mitigate this you can go to about:config (write it in the address bar) and search for a setting called browser.tabs.tabMinWidth, I usually change the number to 20 (the default minimum width is like 70) and tabs are allowed to become roughly as narrow as in chrome. It's a much simpler and stabler option compared to custom CSS

I agree, I honestly expected a much starker difference in land use. I also agree that soy beans can be grown responsibly, except of course it's often not the case. The fact that both soybeans and insects are being grown largely as a source of protein for cattle brings us once again back to the main issue: cows!

According to this study a mealworm farm uses more energy per kg of protein produced compared to chicken, but much less energy than any other meat. However, mealworm farms rank lowest in CO₂-equivalent emissions per kg of protein and lowest in land use compared to all meat products, including chicken.

Apparently soy beans produce 6.82 kg of CO₂-equivalent per kg of protein isolate (which is 90% protein, therefore 7,5 kg of CO₂-equivalent per kg of protein), while mealworm farms produce 14 kg of CO₂-equivalent per kg of protein (and around 30 kg for chicken, the next best option). Worse, but less than double.

As for land use, the first study calculates that to produce 1kg of protein from mealworms it is necessary to use 18 square meters of land per year (including the land to grow food for the worms) while according to this other study vegetable proteins need up to 25 square meters of land per year for each kg of protein.

I admit it's not as big a difference in land use as I thought (it's different studies, they might have slightly different metrics) , but I think there are other factors that make it a much more complicated issue: mass use of fertilizers, monocultures, deforestation, soil impoverishment... An advantage of mealworms might be that you can give them a variety of foods that are easier on the soil (the first study mentioned carrots, grains and other stuff) in order for them to produce protein, while protein-heavy plants require rich soil and tend to drain it fast.