Just wondering if anyone else feels like this. Personally I’m following this community for interesting stuff around Linux and I don’t care too much for a lost percentage or another. Today’s an extreme example with 5 articles (steam share, 2x “10%”, 2x "not actually 10%). This horserace journalism is rarely doing any good imho.
What do you think?
I don’t care for them but I think the recent spate is because 10% is a special type number. Double digit and all. I certainly don’t want linux or other foss to die out but im fine if they don’t dominate.
It looks like network traffic and steam survey data are very noisy. So it’s every other month we get articles like “Linux hit a new percentage record” “Linux just fell down 2 percentage points, will it ever recover” The multitude of articles trying to click bait as much as possible is getting annoying after a while.
I like seeing what cool new tools and toys are coming into the zeitgeist. Even if they’re dumb, or bad, or malicious, as they often are, I think there’s some merit in seeing a thing becoming more or less popular and having a conversation about it.
How much is too much? I don’t know. I think that’s one of the areas where upvoting / downvoting can be useful. And meta posts, for that matter: it’s good for communities to self-regulate this way. Personally I have not felt that there are too many.
One.
The recent news was about network traffic, not market share. Anyone talking about increased market share is making up their own conclusions from the data.
The data is interesting, but not sufficient for that kind of conclusion.
Edit: other market share articles are interesting if they actually show new data and aren’t making up a conclusion.
Two is too many
1.76 in fact. But your approximation is good enough.
1.61803 in fact
1.618028 in phact
