[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

You don’t have to spin it as a business to say that evolving it to reflect reality makes sense. It is not exactly radical to say everybody should get the same level of service that the majority of us get today.

Fewer than 25% of Canadians have door to door delivery. Almost everybody gets delivery to a private mailbox very close to their house. Door to door delivery is down to under 4 million addresses. This is a 10 year plan to finish that transition. Not exactly aggressive.

You can still get delivery to your door if you are disabled.

Regardless of if it is a a business or an essential service, we should be honest about it. We used to send 5 times as much mail when we were fewer people. Why do we have to ignore that?

If 75% of us (like me) are totally fine with super mailboxes, I think the rest can handle it. I know that I could get away with delivery 3 times a week as well. In 2030, how time sensitive is something coming through regular mail. Let’s be real. I could wait one more day.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

There is not hypervisor. So, no hypervisor to update.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

I would have gone with GrubCraft but awesome otherwise.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

There is no stauncher enemy than a friend denied

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

I have 4 kids. Comments telling me to put their groceries and hockey gear in a basket are hilarious.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

Unless they share it against the license terms via copilot of course.

Otherwise, I agree with you.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Permissive licenses are trending in popularity vs copyleft. As a “newer” ecosystem, the Rest-dev culture skews towards permissive.

Why are permissive licenses popular?

Most Open Source software is written by companies.

“Permissive” licenses offer more flexibility and compatibility while minimizing future legal complications. You can replace the word flexibility with the word freedom if you wish. By compatibility, I mean it can be combined with code using other licenses. So no “we cannot combine ZFS and Linux” type problems.

MIT offers the absolute minimum of legal footprint and maximum compatibility.

The above are attributes companies value.

On the other side of the “freedom” front, licenses like MIT guarantee all of the “4 freedoms” that groups like the Free Software Foundation talks about with adding an restrictions on the freedoms of others.

So, why doesn’t everybody use MIT? The patent guarantees in Apache 2.0 are useful if you are ok with the added complexity (still permissive but more legalese).

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 year ago

I do not want Flatpak to replace distro packages.

I use both pacman and apk and they are both far better package managers than Flatpak is. Apk 3 is awesome. And I do not want sandboxes for native packages.

The role of Flatpak is as a distribution method for app developers to target Linux as a platform with a single build. It is a place to get things that may not be in my distro repos. It can be a method for commercial distribution. It is the cure for the “fragmentation” problem that makes it difficult to develop software for Linux.

I hate snaps but snaps could actually be used to replace packages. You could distribute GCC as a snap. In its current form, Flatpak is only targeting GUI applications

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

I am a big RISC-V fan and often write how it will eventually push ARM down but let me do the opposite here.

Apple Silicon uses the ARM ISA but Apple designs the chips themselves and TSMC makes them. This makes it a very different situation from PowerPC.

TSMC offers more advanced manufacturing than Intel does. This is not changing anytime soon. From that perspective, Intel looks to be more in the PowerPC seat this time around. Their recent troubles are going to hang a serious anchor on their R&D. It is not at all clear what their future looks like.

Add to this the timing of Intel stumbling just as the Qualcomm X Elite chips enter the market and we have a very interesting competitive moment. Power and battery life matter a lot these days. Will it matter enough to counter speed bumps in app compatibility? We will see.

Independent of Apple, ARM may become viable in the Windows space and that would be entirely new. If it does not happen, it does not really hurt Apple. However, if ARM does take a cut of the Windows market, it does hurt Intel and puts them more into the place PowerPC was historically. If X Elite ( ARM ) does not fail on Windows, it will probably become the preferred option on laptops. If that happens, maybe it reduces Apple market share as well but not enough to push Apple off their own silicon.

As long as Apple sells enough volume, they can continue to design their own chips. It does not even matter how well ARM themselves are doing. If Apple continues to be good at it, there is no reason to switch.

So, while it sounds like you and I may agree about RISC-V vs ARM, remember that Apple does not buy their chips off of ARM. Apple gets its chips from TSMC and, far from being “old tech”, they are buying manufacturing process superior to anything Intel has access to. Also, Apple’s market is not just laptops and desktops. They are using Apple Silicon in all those iPhones and iPads at volumes that dwarf the PC side.

The reason that Apple moved away from PowerPC ( and Motorola before that ), was because of the economics. With only 15% of the PC market, Apple was the primary driver of PowerPC and had to fund all its innovation ( including manufacturing ). Now, they have control of the design and use it to serve much higher volumes while TSMC ( biggest in the world ) drives the manufacturing at the forefront of the industry. Most importantly, Apple is not really impacted at all by the success of the rest of the ARM space. If ARM fails, it does not really hurt Apple. If ARM is very successful, maybe it helps Apple a bit with more software available, especially on alternative OS like Linux. But alternative OS options for Apple hardware are a mixed blessing for them anyway.

It is a very different world m.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 2 years ago

To quote both of you “nevertheless complies with the GPL and other standard copyleft terms”.

Were you trying to prove his point?

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 3 years ago

You are saying that the elitist reputation of Arch overblown. I agree. It is not that Arch it self is overrated though. Arch is awesome ( and not as “hard” as people make it out to be - we agree on that ).

My favourite distro right now is EndeavourOS and that is just easier to install Arch.

[-] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 3 years ago

Yes, Hitler went to jail for his failed coup in Munich. Ironically, a lot of his popularity stems from that. While I doubt the original commenter actually has the historical knowledge or critical thinking skills, there are some lessons to take from history here.

view more: ‹ prev next ›

LeFantome

0 post score
0 comment score
joined 3 years ago