Yes, I read your comment. It’s okay if you didn’t understand my comment. Clearly you don’t understand how filesystems and drive mounting works under Linux or the role of desktop environments in managing filesystems, mounting, and permissions. I don’t doubt that you’re genuinely struggling here, but there is no call for that kind of hostility. You might have some hope for figuring it out if you open your mind to the fact that you don’t fully understand what your problem is.

Steam expects the games to be in a particular place with a particular set of permissions and ownership relative to the user(s) and/or group(s) expected to use those game files. I’m telling that Linux doesn’t care where those files physically reside. You can tell Steam that those files are exactly where Steam expects them to be at the filesystem level, without messing with Steam configs, nautilus, gnome, or KDE. There are several ways to do this, but without understanding the requirements of your machine no one here will be able to give you effective advice.

I’ve seen some other comments from you about running something or other as root or just blanket chmods to 777 and I can tell you from experience that those are rarely effective solutions and can sometimes make things worse (just try something like that when configuring ssh configs, keys, and permissions).

What does any of this have to do with KDE, Gnome, or nautilus? If symlinks aren’t working, I’d dedicate an entire drive to Steam by mounting that drive (with matching permissions) right where Steam expects to find them. You can mount a filesystem/disc/ISO/drive/network share practically anywhere you want. If your network is fast enough, I bet you could even access your games over NFS, though I wouldn’t recommend it.

This reads like an LLM with a large vocabulary failing to understand the actual context of the conversation. Lots of big words hurled with reckless abandon, lacking any real meaning and having little to do with the actual point.

You are wildly misinformed about how language works.

When I call a fern (or wolf, crab, crow, whale, shark), at that level of syntactical broadly used common word I’m mostly talking about the phenotype, not the genotype. If someone was saying something about a specific fern, then we can argue against those romantic idea of deep time, a little. I mean, we’re probably all descendants of some ancient panspermia event anyway if you want to feel some connection to the ancient forgotten past.

deleted by creator

The article you keep linking disagrees.

Although having given its name to the word henge, Stonehenge is atypical in that the ditch is outside the main earthwork bank.

An atypical example of something is still a “true” example of the thing, especially given that the very term derives its origin from Stonehenge itself.

Edit: Oops, mistook 2 basic pedants regurgitating trivia as the same person.

This whole post is a lie to manipulate people into engaging with an astroturfing bot.

Your comment history doesn’t exactly shy away from hyperbole and antagonizing either. If you smell shit everywhere you go, check your shoes.

Sea lioning in my DMs really just proves my point. Sure, there are trolls out there, but your attitude also attracts and encourages incivility. Don’t feed the trolls.

This gives me God Emperor of Dune vibes.

The diffraction effects from a pinhole camera are not what make them work.

I didn’t say this, you did. You’re chasing your own tail.

The ratio of the size of the image to the distance from the pinhole is the same as the ratio of the size of the sun to the distance to the sun.

A pinhole camera has no lens. The effect here is like a pinhole camera, but a pinhole camera is nothing at all like a lens. Pinholes diffract light. Lens refract light.

EDIT: Of course you can’t resolve an image through diffraction. That’s not how pinholes cameras work. Diffraction negatively impacts image resolution, but it absolutely happens when light passes through them. But, although lens do use refraction to resolve an image, that same process also has unintended negative effects on image resolution (spherical aberration, chromatic aberration, etc.). I didn’t bring up any of that because it was ultimately a distraction from the important part: narrow gaps diffract light, lens refract light, and pinhole cameras do not work like lens.

Dude I’m not arguing that it’s correct or not, I’m saying that this is the way many people used to (and how some still do) use the language.

Yeah, that’s why my comment was basically words and phrases have shifting connotations as time passes and contexts change.

Fake and real photograph used to have a very different meaning indeed.

This is a “real” photo of Denise Richards and Paul Walker:

This is a “fake” photo of Denise Richards and Paul Walker (in the body of a cybernetic T-Rex):

I can tell that this particular port is more or less from the same time as the PS2 ports in the post’s photo because of the color. The standardization of this port happened long before the standardization of colors to indicate the capabilities of said port. We mostly only see this in variously capable USB ports today. If I remember correctly this yellow color would have been used for a joystick or controller of some kind, but there may have been other ports with the same shape and pin configuration that would have different purposes.

I want the word “unalived” to be killed or murdered in the most vile and explicit way possible for a word.

Portal 3?

I don’t know much about either the Order of Canada or Georges St-Pierre. So I looked it up before crafting a pithy response or downvoting and moving on without comment. The wikipedia page for the order states that criteria are basically “Canadians who make a major difference to Canada through lifelong contributions in every field of endeavour” and those that exemplify the motto “they desire a better country”. Nowhere do I see any mentions of excluding someone because their career path wasn’t serious or valid enough. He’s obviously made more of an impact on Canada than most. You can call the whole award a popularity contest and you’d probably be right, but shitting on someone’s accomplishments just because you don’t think their career is valid enough just feels gross.