has dust changed

Dust. Dust never changes.

Good to know. We initially set that network up well over a decade ago so my knowledge isn't exactly current.

You could try Tinc but it's fairly involved to get running. Pretty nice if you have a root server and want to get several people wired up, though. There are probably easier solutions for your use case.

Yep. I run Garuda and the main pull is that it's a more user-friendly Arch with a lot of stuff I want to use preinstalled. I don't really care about how XTREME it is or whether I might potentially get 1 FPS more.

Android already does that, no AI required. Some fairly simple math is enough.

The device first charges to 80% and holds there. It also calculates how long it will need to charge from there to full and when it will need to resume charging so that it will hit 100% just before the next alarm goes off. Then it does that.

Also, Ubuntu is moving towards using snaps for everything so they're pretty much the successor to PPAs.

Mostly yes but there's one other option that simplifies the whole thing: Chromebooks. They're actually pretty decent for someone who doesn't need much beyond a browser, a mail client, and a basic office suite.

Sure, they're tied to Google with all that entails but they can be a real option for someone like a senior who relies on relatives for tech support.

Unbothered by typos. Moisturized. Happy. In My Lane. Focused. Flourishing.

Ah, good old Book of Erotic Fantasy. It's so gloriously stupid that everyone should own a copy. That table is by far not the silliest part of the book.

It's only bested by the official sex rulebook for The Dark Eye, which is an April Fools joke that spiraled out of control and has actual rules for intercourse – deliberately bureaucratic and unsexy ones included purely as a "you asked for it" joke at the reader's expense.

That's cool if you don't overdo it.

In the end it boils down to trust. The party will (most likely) regularly expose themselves to mortal danger. They need to be able to trust each other with their lives. If a character habitually cheats them out of loot they might find it hard to trust that character. So why would they travel with this person?

This doesn't rule out playing an untrustworthy character but it makes it harder to justify their presence, especially over long periods of time. A dodgy thief might be needed for one quest but why are they kept around afterwards? Inquiring minds want to know.

It's a sliding scale. Your arcane trickster doesn't sound like she's super far down the scale so she's probably good even if the rest of the party notices. Or maybe she never even hid it in the first place. That also works.

And that's why comparing different people's ratings is so difficult. 10/10 can mean "absolutely perfect and impossible to ever improve upon", it can mean "the best possible execution right now", it can mean "the best expected result with no major flaws", it can mean "I had a good time and would recommend this to anyone", and so on. All of these definitions are valid.

Aggregate scores paper over those differences. That automatically makes them less accurate.

It's that way with d10s for me. I see a nice-looking set of D&D dice and I pass it up because I know that I will basically never really use exotic dice like d12 or d8. Or d6, actually.

Look, what I'm saying is that they should sell pretty sets of 100d10 for those of us who play Exalted 2E.