They have an algorithm which can account for every micro-taste on the planet. What's the point of having computers if they can't properly account for the real world?
Because, for one thing, the purpose of Netflix is to display movies and TV shows. Almost every movie or TV show ever made has some children in it somewhere, at least in the background.
When your entire content is full of triggers for those who lost a child, what's one more trigger at the loading screen?
They just need to add an option to hide the "kids" profile, which, as is being noted all over this comment thread, would be useful for a number of reasons.
Running companies like this is how you end up with the current state of Boeing. Only valuing engineers who are directly earning you profit and firing the ones who only have an indirect role in your profit centers.
> If your work isn’t clearly connected to company profit, your position is unstable
You know what really makes your position unstable as an engineer? Delaying a product over "safety" concerns, thereby doing work that's clearly connected to preventing company profit. Only young, bright-eyed engineers would be naive enough to bring up safety concerns right?
> Or even worse, engineers who are preventing you from making profit over "safety" concerns.
Ugh, this.
After doing SRE for nearly a decade and being utterly pigeonholed, I've come to believe it's more accurately placed in the "controlled opposition" bucket than anything about either reliability or engineering.
If you using fake deadlines to stress employees and force them to go the extra mile and do crunch time to meet those deadlines then that's worker exploitation.
> While the Linux syscalls themselves are very stable and reliable, the c library on top of them is not. Practically all of userland is based on libc, and therefore by proxy Linux itself has a binary compatibility problem.
People who primarily use Linux often forget that Windows has the exact same problem. In the case of Windows libc is distributed as part of the Visual C++ runtime. Each version of Visual Studio has its own version of the VC++ runtime and the application is expected to redistribute the version of VC++ it needs.
The only thing Windows does better is ensuring that they maintain backwards compatibility in libc until they release a new version of Visual Studio.
In Winapi land, the equivalent of "the c library" is NTDLL,its wrappers and other supporting libs (advapi32,userenv,etc... and Win32 specific libs which I consider equivalent to X11 libs). MSVCR in my opinion is there to provide the stdlib for C/C++ programs. In Linux land, the library that provides the C stdlib also wraps syscalls, in Windows, the C stdlib is a wrapper/interface for Windows api's.
My opinion is that they're both great. I really like how clean and well thought out the Windows API's are. Compared to Linux equivalents they're very stable and easier to use. But that doesn't mean there is anything wrong with C stdlib implementation on either OS. But for system API's, Linux is a bit messy, that mess is the result of having so many people have strong opinions, and Linux trying to adhere to the Unix principle of a modular user-space ecosystem.
For example, there is no "Linux graphics api", there is X11 and Wayland and who knows what else, and neither have anything to do with the Linux project. There are many highly opinionated ways to do simple things, and that is how Linux should be. In the same vein, installing apps on Linux is simply querying your package manager, but on Windows there is no "Microsoft package repo" where everyone dumps their apps (although they are trying to fix that in many ways), and that's how Windows should be.
Let Linux be Linux and Windows be Windows. They're both great if you appreciate them for what they are and use the accordingly.
Microsoft has always been end-user-hostile. You hack around it :)
Reverse-engineer it's undesirable behavior, mitigate it. The real stuff that scares me is hardware-based (secure enclave computing for example) and legal measures it is taking to prevent us from hacking it.
ReactOS exists, as does Wine. Linux is a purely monolithic Kernel, unlike NT which is a hybrid that has the concept of subsystems built into it. Linux would have to have the concept of subsystems and have an NT-interop layer (probably based off of Wine), the advantage over Wine I fail to see.
In the end, where is the demand coming from I ask? Not from Linux devs in my opinion. I suppose a Wine focused distro might please folks like you, but Wine itself has lots of bugs and errors even after all these years. I doubt it is keeping up with all the Windows11 changes even, what the author proposes, in my opinion is not practical, at least not if you are expecting an experience better than ReactOS or Wine. If it is just Win32/winapi interop layer, it might be possible, but devs would need to demand it, otherwise who will use it?
Linux users are the most "set in their way" from my experience, try convincing any Linux dev to stop using gtk/qt and write apps for "this new Windows like api interface to create graphical apps".
but ultimately, there is no harm in trying other than wasted time and resources. I too would like to see an ecosystem that learns and imitates windows in many ways (especially security measures).
>There are many highly opinionated ways to do simple things, and that is how Linux should be
I still believe we would be in a better place had BSD was ready for adoption before Linux. Linux is a kernel and a wide family of operating systems assembled from the kernel and different bits and pieces while BSD tried to be a very coherent operating system from the start.
I remember trying to get a program installed on Windows. It complained that I didn't have the right VC redistributable.
I had like ten of them installed — I think several from the same year! — cause every program usually bundles its own.
I found the exact version of vcredist installer I needed but then that one refused to install because I already had a slightly newer version. So I had to uninstall that first.
As far as I'm aware this problem still exists in Wine, I installed something in Wine yesterday and I had to use winetricks commands to get the vcredist installers from Microsoft's servers. (Also illegally download some fonts, otherwise my installer refused to start...)
Next time that happens, search "vcredist aio". I can't endorse any of the scripts that are out there but there are many scripts that will pull them from Microsoft and install them all with the unattended flag.
Is libc updates really the primary problem with the ABI breaks on Linux? Glibc isn't perfect but it has versioned symbols going back a long time now. My guess would be the problem is actually abandoned versions of other libraries (e.g. SDL1, old versions of gtk2?) and maybe a handful of other things.
Yeah, glibc is extremely stable and you can be sure that an app compiled against it now will work well into the future. People just completely ignore that fact based on hearsay, and that the removal of a unused symbol hashing table from the glibc binary broke a few anticheat systems that were attempting to parse it.
Other libraries are the problem, usually. People are generally really good about changing the .so version of a library when the ABI changes in a backwards-incompatible way. Usually distributions ship both versions until everything they ship either has upgraded or been removed. Solutions like appimage can allow you to ship these libraries in your app.
No, not at all, but that's a different problem. That issue is about linkage between two different binaries that have _TIME_BITS=32 and _TIME_BITS=64, not an issue with linking to glibc. However, that's only an issue when you are dealing with software that passes time_t in the ABI. Of course, on the whole, a distribution has to deal with all kinds of weirdly-intermingled and low-level packages, so this does happen a very non-trivial amount of times surely, but in general I expect that a lot of old binary software will be alright. You'd only run into this particular problem if you had an old binary that interfaced with another library that is provided by the system that did this. I didn't check, but I'd be quite surprised to find random time_t in most popular library APIs, e.g. I don't expect to see this in SDL or GTK.
Of course, if you did need to support this case, you don't need to throw the baby out with the bathwater necessarily. You'd just need a _TIME_BITS=32 build of whatever libraries do have time_ts in their ABI, and if that blog post is any indication Gentoo will probably have a solution for that in the future. I like the idea of jamming more backwards-compatibility work into the system dynamic linker. I think we should do more of that.
In any case, this issue is not a case where glibc broke something, it's a case where the ABI had to break. I understand that may seem like nitpicking, but on the other hand, consider what happens in 2038: All of the old binary software that relies on time_t being 32-bit will stop working properly even if you do have 32-bit time_t shims, at which point you'll need dirtier and likely less effective hacks if you want to be able to keep said software functioning.
Someone comes along and builds their software on the latest bleeding-edge Linux distro. It won't run on older (or even many current) Linux desktops. People curse Linux ABI instability because new binaries aren't supported by an older operating system. It is in fact the opposite to the Windows situation, in which older software continues to run on newer operating systems, but good luck getting the latest Windows software to run on a Windows 95 desktop. People are very quick to conflate the two situations so they can score more fake internet points.
The situation is not limited to desktops. For example, a very popular commercial source forge web service does not work on browsers released more than about 10 weeks ago. The web itself has become fantastically unstable and almost unusable for anything except AI bots consuming what other AI bots spew.
(Opinions are my own, I have no inside knowledge.)
I vaguely remember hearing that P2P Skype was the bane of sysadmins' existence. Skype would elect clients on high-bandwidth networks as supernodes. This tended to be business customers - the very organizations MS wanted to attract. Skype's prodigious hole-punching ability made it difficult to throttle, so it got banned from a lot of enterprises. MS essentially hosted the supernodes on Azure, which centralized it.
As for encryption, on the other hand, Wikipedia says MS specifically added the ability to eavesdrop for law enforcement agencies, though apparently Skype had already added a backdoor for the NSA before MS bought them: https://news.softpedia.com/news/Skype-Provided-Backdoor-Acce...
This [1] is one of my favorite leaks from Snowden revelations, and I regularly bring it up anytime people try to downplay what PRISM is. That's a user manual for NSA agents on how to spy on Skype users (including video and text) in real time. It's informative and also amusing at times. For instance in the FAQ one issue a confused spook might run into is why they're being spammed with the same messages repeatedly. It turns out that when a user logs on to a new device, the recent messages Microsoft sends to the user are also directly forwarded to the NSA, which can result (from their perspective) in messages being repeated.
i wonder if some Estonian could justvrerelease the p2p originals . After all as america deteriorates its own influence , at some point the lawyers of the big 4 will be seen as barely disguised tendril of a hostile power in Europe . Who cares about your sales contracts if the president goes for Greenland . We might see a SkyEarthFireWater-Open source re-release one day. Just another tradewar anecdote .
The big 4 will be seen as a hostile power within Europe? The big 4 ARE (mostly) European. What are you talking about?
Sales contracts? What do you mean in what context?
I agree that it would be cool if the original p2p Skype somehow resurfaces, but I can't make any sense of the rest of your post or what it has to do with the subject at hand?
Join us back in the real world with no Trump derangement syndrome and you'll find out that European governments want an airtight control on companies so they can surveil them and people absolutely.
They want narrative control and squashing rising political opposition.
The point is that given the current valuations, being good at a bunch of narrow use cases is just not good enough. It needs to be able to replace humans in every role where the primary output is text or speech to meet expectations.
I don't think that "replacing humans in every role" is the line for "being bullish on AI models". I think they could stop development exactly where they are, and they would still make pretty dramatic improvements to productivity in a lot of places. For me at least, their value already exceeds the $20/month I'm paying, and I'm pretty sure that way more than covers inference costs.
> I think they could stop development exactly where they are, and they would still make pretty dramatic improvements to productivity in a lot of places.
Yup. Not to mention, we don't even have time to figure out how to effectively work with one generation of models, before the next generation of models get released and rises the bar. If development stopped right now, I'd still expect LLMs to get better for years, as people slowly figure out how to use them well.
Completely agree. As is, Cursor and ChatGPT and even Bing Image Create (for free generation of shoddy ideas, styles, concepts, etc) are very useful to me. In fact, it would suit me if everything stalled at this point rather than improve to the point that everyone can catch up in how they use AI.
One note missing from the YCbCr color space explanation is that, while HDMI does support YCbCr, the spec requires all video sources to also offer an RGB stream. Thus it is not possible to use HDMI for a device that can only output YCbCr.
Why, because one has a critical mass of 9-10 kg and the other has a critical mass of 11 kg? You'd think it would matter a great deal more that the amount he obtained was apparently 35 nanograms, so he was about a hundred million samples short of a working reactor.
Pu-238 isn't usably fissile for weapons purposes (and apparently[0] isn't regulated as such (?)). Just look at the hero image on its Wikipedia entry[1]. A critical mass would have >5 kW of decay heat.
Many jurisdictions add fines for various parts of the process. Lab fees, probation fees, rehab fees, jail fees, and on and on. Some do even charge a prosecution fee to fund the district attorney.
They're just sitting down for a relaxing movie or series and the first thing that comes up is the question: "You don't have kids right?"
reply