They officially don’t care about running .NET applications on Linux anymore. They never really did before but so few people fell for that trap Microsoft is finally ready to turn in the towel
Father, Hacker (Information Security Professional), Open Source Software Developer, Inventor, and 3D printing enthusiast
They officially don’t care about running .NET applications on Linux anymore. They never really did before but so few people fell for that trap Microsoft is finally ready to turn in the towel
Who are the people that care about these things? Everyone’s going to put a case on it anyway.
If I were in charge of product design we’d have two phones:
You’ll quickly find out which brands of filament aren’t of the highest quality, haha.
Pro-tip: PETG (even the shittiest brands) won’t clog 99.999% of the time 👍
(There’s always contaminants that can make their way into any filament… Even large chunks of dust/gunk in your house)
Tom’s Hardware tested this software version of BitLocker last year and found it could slow drives by up to 45 percent.
WTF‽ In Linux full disk encryption overhead is minimal:
While in pure I/O benchmarks like FIO there is an obvious impact to full disk encryption and other synthetic workloads, across the real-world benchmarks the performance impact of running under full disk encryption tended to be minimal
https://www.phoronix.com/review/hp-devone-encrypt/5
There’s like five million ways you can use disk encryption on Linux though and not all of them are very performant. So keep that in mind if you see other benchmarks showing awful performance (use the settings Phoronox used).
I suspect Microsoft made some poor decisions in regards to disk encryption (probably because of bullshit/insecure-by-design FIPS compliance) and now they’re stuck with them.
It’s not just actually innovative patents that are missing from the patent system (which they are). It has also become so expensive to both file and litigate a patent that only big businesses and patent trolls can afford it.
The median cost to litigate a patent is five fucking million dollars (in 2021). What this means is that if your patented solution isn’t worth at least 2x that amount it is quite simply not worth patenting.
The whole system should be scrapped. It was fundamentally flawed from the start and has demonstrated over and over again that it does not scale. It’s not even worth it to keep pharmaceutical patents (there’s other, better, cheaper ways to come up with new drugs than $100 billion dollar commercial entities ripping us all off and spending half their budgets on marketing).
A list of the effected processors would’ve been nice, Wired.
When one of two things happens:
When “AI” hype dies down we are likely to see “AI” removed from various topics because enough people know and understand the hyped parent topic. It’ll just be “image generation”, “video generation”, “generated text”, etc.
He’s open to investment 🤷
To be fair, I love my dog but he has the same output 🤷
Market shows that hype is a cycle and the AI hype is nearing its end.
My doorbell camera manufacturer now advertises their products as using, “Local AI” meaning, they’re not relying on a cloud service to look at your video in order to detect humans/faces/etc. Honestly, it seems like a good (marketing) move.
Options:
Just a point of clarification: Copyright is about the right of distribution. So yes, a company can just “download the Internet”, store it, and do whatever TF they want with it as long as they don’t distribute it.
That the key: Distribution. That’s why no one gets sued for downloading. They only ever get sued for uploading. Furthermore, the damages (if found guilty) are based on the number of copies that get distributed. It’s because copyright law hasn’t been updated in decades and 99% of it predates computers (especially all the important case law).
What these lawsuits against OpenAI are claiming is that OpenAI is making a derivative work of the authors/owners works. Which is kinda what’s going on but also not really. Let’s say that someone asks ChatGPT to write a few paragraphs of something in the style of Stephen King… His “style” isn’t even cooyrightable so as long as it didn’t copy his works word-for-word is it even a derivative? No one knows. It’s never been litigated before.
My guess: No. It’s not going to count as a derivative work. Because it’s no different than a human reading all his books and performing the same, perfectly legal function.