Because it’s a “free” piece of software so you are the product and therefore they want you to agree that they can harvest and sell your data
Because it’s a “free” piece of software so you are the product and therefore they want you to agree that they can harvest and sell your data
Right, I based it on an estimate on the size of the company and how many devs they’ve had. But if a 7MB file doubled their build size and nobody noticed for 5 years, it likely wasn’t code reviewed or committed and rather just added somewhere, It’d be my guess that it’s a pretty small team, and if they’re willing to call anyone at this point anyway as they only have a few devs, and not just remove the file, they’re probably unsure on if it serves any sort of point, which usually would be clear in a commit or PR
You think they’d call up devs who left them just to ask if they happen to know about a random file?
I mean, that’s what op said happened. Literally with the verbiage of “file we found” and not “file you committed”
Ah I could see that. I took it as them not knowing where the file came from at all, so they’re just asking all the devs who would have had access at that point, which is why it was “hey do you know anything about this file?” and not “is there a specific reason you committed this file to the build?”
It sounds like they weren’t using any form of version control, so that’s definitely on them at this point
Agreed, things like DLSS are the right kind of application of AI to games, same with frame generation. The wrong kind is trying to figure out how to replace developers, artists of every kind, actors, etc in the production process with AI. That being said though, companies like Nvidia absolutely can and will profit off making sure that a game cannot run well on anything but the latest hardware that they sell, so the whole “you need to buy our stuff to play games because it has the good ai and now all games require the good ai” is capitalist bullshit
Looks great, thanks for sharing
Random recommendation, but I recently stumbled upon https://monaspace.githubnext.com, and it seems like a pretty cool approach to the whole “monospace font for dev work”
Lol the out of memory error was a joke. A reference to that two people both trying to do the same thing will fill the heap since there’s unnecessary work.
I tried to make a code joke but it failed.
As far as what are they unwilling to release? Control. Ownership of any bit of the kernel they control
kernel maintainer Ted Ts’o, emphatically interjects: “Here’s the thing: you’re not going to force all of us to learn Rust.”
Lina tried to push small fixes that would make the C code “more robust and the lifetime requirements sensible,” but was blocked by the maintainer.
DeVault writes. “Every subsystem is a private fiefdom, subject to the whims of each one of Linux’s 1,700+ maintainers, almost all of whom have a dog in this race. It’s herding cats: introducing Rust effectively is one part coding work and ninety-nine parts political work – and it’s a lot of coding work.”
It’s a whole different ballgame. I’ve written a good amount of C and C++ in my day. I’ve been learning Rust for a year or so now. Switching between allocating your own memory and managing it, and the concept of “Ownership” https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch04-01-what-is-ownership.html is just something many devs set in their ways aren’t willing to do.
I understand where they’re coming from, I’ve gone through massive refactors with new tech in my career. I think this approach needs to be more methodical and cautious than it is, but I don’t think they are correct in the end result. I think a memory-safe language is the way to go, and it needs to happen.
This to me is a classic software project with no manager and a bunch of devs arguing internally with no clear external goals. There needs to be definitive goals set over a timeline. If someone doesn’t agree after a consensus is reached they can leave the project. But as of now I think as others have said this is 80% infighting, 20% actual work that’s happening.
Ironically the majority of the rust memory management ruleset is called ownership, and they are unwilling to release any of it, and claiming all of it, so there’s an out of memory error.
But on the other hand you can’t expect some smaller and smaller subset of the population to primarily just learn C and meet the criteria of a kernel dev.
I absolutely agree with all your points, and most rust devs would agree, but the general idea is that over time that energy (which would have been spent tweaking malloc and such) should be spent on the rust compiler and memory management systems, which is already magic as someone who as written a lot of c, c++, and spent the better part of a year learning rust. (I’m no expert of course, but I have a pretty decent grasp on the low level memory management of both the Linux kernel and the rust compiler).
So that over time the effort that would be spent on memory management and kernel functionality can be properly divided. Rust not being efficient somewhere in catching memory faults or managing memory? Fix it. Someone writing unsafe rust code? Fix it.
I think at the end of the day everyone wants the same thing which is a memory safe kernel, and I think that rust Is being shoehorned into kernel projects too early in places where it shouldn’t be, but I also think there is unnatural resistance to it just because it’s different elsewhere to “how it’s always been done.”
Right, but he’s placing a subtle idea on people that wage theft isn’t a thing, overtime shouldn’t be a thing, and we shouldn’t have regulation for that. There’s a reason SREs get paid so much money, and it’s because it’s in their contract that they have to be the ones to rotate shifts and be up at 2am during an upgrade or otherwise, and he’s just mad he can’t pay everyone less and make more money
micro has some improvements and default shortcuts that are much closer to common GUI text editors
and there’s not even a battle royale mode smh
True, I guess my experience was moreso “we can legally sell out whenever.”
For a long time I used mediatemple for their affordability, flexibility, and scalability
Then they were acquired by godaddy
https://origin-blog.mediatemple.net/news/a-new-chapter-for-media-temple/
Then I used webfaction, for the same reasons. They too were acquired by godaddy
https://groups.google.com/g/cloudy-dev/c/LF1eDRHt1W0
Many of the devs from web faction built opalstack, which I love
But I definitely won’t expect their terms to remain the same forever
and you can expect the terms to stay the same forever
Bit of a reach, but I agree with your other points
And if it was a kernel-level driver that failed, Linux machines would fail to boot too. The amount of people seeing this and saying “MS Bad,” (which is true, but has nothing to do with this) instead of “how does an 83 billion dollar IT security firm push an update this fucked” is hilarious
I was referring to Clipchamp, not the OS