Euh… How? Coming from somebody that has a dualboot system with tpm and secure boot lol

Kinda the reason i dont like kotaku tbh. They do such things very often and it always feel like they are taunting or flexing and it comes over as really douchy to me

True, i was using w10 + wsl until this week. With my new pc i want to switch to linux full time as i did with my laptop. Photoshop and lightroom are the only apps i have issues with atm ( office will follow… ) and dont want to go back to windows full time for them alone. Hence the dual boot in case i need them :p

Thanks, that doesnt fill me with a lot of hope, but thats why i have dual boot set up with linux (mint) as main os. Ill try wine regarfless before going to windows though

That too

They dont own it, they just own seats at the foundation table and thats not even 50% of the seats :p

How well does a windows vm run in linux? Does it have hardware acceleration?
Asking because i need something to run photoshop and lightroom, which both need hardware acceleration :/

A fair enough. That sucks major balls

Nice. Id instantly stop using those apps. But it looks like it just checks if dev settings are enabled. You can disable them again after unlocking bootloader you know :D

Til then, stuff works on my phone/lineageos but i thought they only checked for root because then things can go haywire and become unsafe then.

Unlocked bootloader should be fine. Now rooted android is a whole different beast…

He isnt wrong. This comes from somebody who technically uses ai daily to help develop ( github copilot in visual studio to assist in code prediction based on the code base of the solution ), but AI is marketed even worse than blockchain back in 2017. Its everywhere, in every product, even if it doesnt have ai or has nothing to do with it. Monitor ai shit? Mouse with ai? Hell, ive seen a sketch of a fucking toaster with ‘ai’.
There is shit like microsoft recall, apple intelligence, bing co pilot, office co pilot, …
All of those are just… Nothing special or useful. There are also chatbots which bring nothing new to the table either.
Everyone and everything wants to market there stuff with ai and its disgusting.
Does that mean that current ai tech cant bring anything to the table? No, it totally can, but 90% of ai stuff out there is, just like linus says, marketing bullshit.

You can. There are physical , drm free, releases and drm free releases on gog :p No online required either. So yes, you can :)

As a software developer i know what iterative development means, its in our blood and brains ( or at least it should be ). Simulations can indeed only get you so far, and i agree sometimes you have to make things and take a plunge. However, and i would like to be really wrong here so correct me if im wrong, but other companies like nasa, do not just shoot shit up in space and hope for the best. They arent allowed to do so for a reason. They test and calculate everything very rigoursly to make sure itll hold up as expected. From thruster power, resistance to continues extreme heat from reentry, …
All of that they do here, on earth, before shooting anything up into space. Otherwise things like the rover on mars would have needed like 20 tries instead of 2.

These are things that looks like spacex is just throwing out the window.
To take it back to software development, they are doing an iterative development ( which is very good for what they are doing! ) but their testing before production/release of software is so basic theyll just see how it responds out there. Thats a huge nono to me if youre going to end up crashing all those rockets in the sea killing a shit ton of nature in the process. Sometimes the means dont justify the costs to me, and this is one of them. Yes, the booster catching was nice to see ( eventhough it nearly ended badly ) and its idea is very good and needed, but the way to get there is…messy.

Specially this. How space x handles failures is a very hard nono in my book. “But we test in the field” is what space x says, and as a software developer its like saying “we test in production”.
Yes youll get something use able faster, but its way way more costly in the long run and is nasty in between.
My arse they cant test this stuff on earth. We have simulations, models, calculations, test, everything. Yes, things can and will sometimes still fail when going in production ( in flight ) but you want to lower the risk of it failing cause its costly as fuck.

They dont seem to care though.

Also, im not saying what they are building towards is bad, it really really isnt, but their methods is… Bad

Maybe they wrote their own emulator

It makes sense to exist… In the 40’s.
But with modern day society and how small the world has become, it makes no sense to me to still exist tbh…

Ye, i dont know how it is worldwide but here in west europe paying online with your bank is just like paying with paypal. The only advantages paypal has over my bank is its return policy and it technically not directly linking the purchase with my personal info.
I havent used paypal in a while tbh…

Thanks, i was thinking id need to go check them later today and that it was kinda illegal. Now i can be rest assured its fiiine

I think you have things wrong. Any other languages can have libraries be distributed as some format that would allow applications to use it, be it linux/gcc and .a files ( which are actually archives with elf/object files of the code ), or a full on library like .so/.dll.
Rust can only do .o/.dll and only have it expose like a c library afaik. Even .net has improved on the .dll and includes all its language features in it. Rust has none of that. Its not true that libraries not rebuilding are only for closed source. Its also ease of use/access and less problem prone. What if i build my library using a different version of the compiler than you and your application? I could have no problems building my library, while you cant build your application because the library i made gets rebuild and errors.
These errors happen and are all because there is no stable interface/abi and all other languages have overcome this.

Also, by default, nothing in c is rebuild unless it needs to. Thats why the intermediate .o ( elf object ) files exist, so it only has to do the relinking and not recompile and thats why .a archive/libraries in c work, because it doesnt recompile. Unless you meant the fact rust can rebuild part of a file, without recompiling it completely?

I think you dont fully understand how c compilers ( gcc specifically ) work when using multi file projects ( and not just doing gcc input.c -o output.exe ) just how i dont fully know how the rust compiler works. Also, anything using IL will always have an abi, because how else will it jump from code to IL code, so its obvious that rust to wasm will have to abide by that haha. Be it c wasm, c# wasm or rust wasm calling one another. Wasm is wasm, and you only need an exposed interface to call or include the other wasm ( c#/blazor having NativeFileReference in the csproj )

Again, i like the idea of rust, but it has a long way to go to be viable atm. And it has many pitfalls to avoid so it doesnt become the hot mess that is any framework based on node.js