Full on invasion is not the only risk. What if we wanted to support allies in protecting Greenland? What if we wanted to conduct an operation elsewhere in the world that the US disagrees with?

It is not impossible to believe the US oppose NATO from defending a county against Russia. That is the enemy the Gripens were specifically designed to fight.

Canada needs to increase readiness at its southern border. Focus on where the threat is.

The Canadian boycott Is succeeding beyond all expectations.

Travel especially but also food. Jim Beam is ceasing operations at one of their plants and the Canadian boycott is a major factor.

Are Canadians still invested too much in US tech. Yes. As is the entire world.

The one area I would love to see things ramp up is cars. If Canadians stopped buying US manufactured cars, that would really make a difference.

And while I cannot imagine what you think Carney has to do with banks being some of the biggest businesses in Canada, this is one of the success stories of Canadian sovereignty. Canadian banks bought US assets for pennies on the dollar in 2008. Same for Canadian real estate players. If things continue as they are, they may get a chance to do it again.

Agreed.

What is even stranger, but great, is that they plan to release a 26.04 LTS in 4 months.

That will be the start of the real next generation for Pop!OS. We should get a real sense of where System76 wants to go with COSMIC then. Today is all about getting a minimally viable system into production so people can start to use it. Making 24.04 an LTS means that people do not have to hold off until next year.

I guess I should have put a /s but I thought it was pretty obvious. The 68 in Algol 68 is 1968. COBOL is from 1959. Modula-2 is from 1977.

My point exactly was that all the hot new languages are built with LLVM while the “new” language options on GCC are languages from the 50’s, 60’s, and 70’s.

I am not even exaggerating. That is just what the projects look like right now.

Is it that people don’t mind sounding like morons in public or that they think everybody else is stupid enough to fall for their nonsense? I always wonder when I read something like this.

I would say that you make a decent argument that the ALU has the strongest claim to the “bitness” of a CPU. In that way, we are already beyond 64 bit.

For me though, what really defines a CPU is the software that runs natively. The Zen4 runs software written for the AMD64 family of processors. That is, it runs 64 bit software. This software will not run on the “32 bit” x86 processors that came before it ( like the K5, K6, and original Athlon ). If AMD released the AMD128 instruction set, it would not run on the Zen4 even though it may technically be enough hardware to do so.

The Motorola 68000 only had a 16 but ALU but was able to run the same 32 bit software that ran in later Motorola processors that were truly 32 bit. Software written for the 68000 was essentially still native on processors sold as late as 2014 ( 35 years after the 68000 was released ). This was not some kid of compatibility mode, these processors were still using the same 32 bit ISA.

The Linux kernel that runs on the Zen4 will also run on 64 bit machines made 20 years ago as they also support the amd64 / x86-64 ISA.

Where the article is correct is that there does not seem to be much push to move on from 64 bit software. The Zen4 supports instructions to perform higher-bit operations but they are optional. Most applications do not rely on them, including the operating system. For the most part, the Zen4 runs the same software as the Opteron ( released in 2003 ). The same pre-compiled Linux distro will run on both.

This “skills issue” thing just sounds so stupid in my ears. I am sick of reading it.

So, I am choosing a language that I hope will ensure fast, secure, and sophisticated code for my project. It has to do this for code I write, my team writes, and all future maintainers and contributors will write as well. If I choose a language that makes it easy to write unstable, fragile, and insecure code then “the skills issue” applies more to my lack of capability as an architect than it does the coders that come after me.

Stop saying, “well ya, it is super easy to make these mistakes in this language but that would never happen if you are as awesome as I am” and thinking that sounds like an intelligent argument for your language choice. There are better options. Consider them.

I do not want to fight and say you misunderstood. Let’s just say you have been very influenced by one perspective.

Wayland has taken a while to fully flesh out. Part of that has been delay by the original designers not wanting to compromise their vision. Most of it is just the time it takes to replace something mature ( X11 is 40 years old ). A lot of what feels like Wayland problems actually stem from applications not migrating yet.

While there are things yet to do, the design of Wayland is proving itself to be better fundamentally. There are already things Wayland can do that X11 likely never will ( like HDR ). Wayland is significantly more secure.

At this point, Wayland is either good enough or even superior for many people. It does not yet work perfectly for NVIDIA users which has more to do with NVIDIA’s choices than Wayland. Thankfully, it seems the biggest issues have been addressed and will come together around May.

The desktop environments and toolkits used in the most popular distros default to Wayland anlready and will be Wayland only soon. Pretty much all the second tier desktop environments have plans to get to Wayland.

We will exit 2024 with almost all distros using Wayland and the majority of users enjoying Wayland without issue.

X11 is going to be around for a long time but, on Linux, almost nobody will run it directly by 2026.

Wayland is hardly the Hubble.

Wait. It is MIT licensed now? Ok. Now I am totally excited. I will be starting a project based on this immediately.

Manjaro - used to love it. Now the only distro I actively advise against

Garuda - just too much ( I prefer Arch / EndeavourOS )

Elementary - wanted to love it - just too limited

Gentoo - realized I just don’t want to build everything

RHEL Workstation - everything too old

Bhodi - honestly do not remember - long ago

Ubuntu - ok, let’s expand…

These days, I dislike Snaps. Ubuntu just never hit the sweet spot for me though. I was already an experienced Linux user when it appeared and preferred RPM based distros at the tome. Ubuntu always seemed slow and fragile to me. Setting things up, like Apache with Mono back in the day, was “different” on Ubuntu and that annoyed me. For most of its history, it is what I would recommend to new users but I just never liked it myself.

Debian Stable - ok, let’s expand

I really like Debian. It was also a little “alien” when I was using Fedora / Mandrake and the like but it never bothered me like Ubuntu. I ran RHEL / Centos as servers so I did not need Debian stability. As a desktop, Debian packages were always just a little too old ( especially for dev ). The lack of non-free firmware made it a pain.

These days though, Debian has been growing on me. The move to include non-free firmware has made it much more practical. With Flatpaks and Distrobox, aging packages is much less of a problem too. I could see myself using Debian. I am strongly considering moving to VanillaOS ( immutable Debian ).

I basically do not run any RHEL servers anymore. At home, I have a fair bit running Debian already ( Proxmox, PiHole, PiVPN, and a Minecraft server ).

EndeavourOS is my primary desktop these days ( and I love it ) but it is mostly for the AUR. A Debian base with an Arch Distrobox might be perfect. Void seems quite nice as well.

I have been an Open Source advocate forever ( and used to say Free Software and FLOSS ). I have used Linux daily since the 0.99 kernels and I even installed 386BSD back in the day. Despite that, the biggest “not for me” distros right now are anything too closely associated with the politics of the GNU project. It has almost made me want to leave Linux and I have considered moving to FreeBSD. I would love to use Haiku. OCI containers and the huge software ecosystem keep me on Linux though.

The distribution that intrigues me the most right now is Chimera Linux. I run it with an Arch distrobox and it may become my daily driver. The pragmatism of projects like SerenityOS really attracts me. Who knows it may be what finally pulls me away after 30+ years of Linux.

I used to love Manjaro. It looks gorgeous ( to my eye ). Sadly, I now see it as a bit of a low-quality mess with governance issues. Manjaro broke my system more than once. Although I did not believe it when I used Manjaro, getting off of it has shown me that I regularly had AUR compatibility problems as well.

These days, I would recommend EndevourOS over Manjaro. It is just as easy in practice, I have found it to be far more stable. Once installed, EndevourOS is 99.8% the same as a well configured vanilla Arch. It uses the Arch package repositories natively.

Even more than Manjaro, I used to love Pamac and graphical package management. Now I think Pamac is garbage. It has caused so many problems for me. I mostly use yay to manage packages now. A really great middle ground between GUI package management and yay or pacman is pacseek. You have to use yay to install it but, for the times I may have missed Pamac, it has been awesome.