This is wrong on so many levels, it is incredible.

Indeed. These "young savages" put in tons of features, optimze things, but forget about the core functionality that the tools were created for in the first place, because they never used it that way themselves. And that is a main reason for not replacing things that work well with just a few minor issues: It is very hard to get to the same quality level and in fact most people cannot do it. It also takes a long time. Maybe in 10 years systemd will have reached the quality-level of other init systems, but with all the other stuff being pulled in and added, it is more like 30 years or never. That is not smart, that is making all the mistakes Brooks wrote about decades ago.

My guess is that the systemd core team just did not have the stones to have their product compete on merit. They had to pull in udev and are trying to get even more things in there to make it as hard as possible to do without their product. If they had not done that, I would have happily ignored systemd and many distros could easily offer it as an alternative only. Most of this backlash we are currently seeing is about their efforts to remove choice or at least makeit as difficult as possible to not use their thing. That is as anti-freedom as it gets and people are rightlully upset about it.

It has been tried for several decades, despite the stupidity even believing it is possible. Fist, there is this thing that eventually, any music has to be made analog before it can be listened to. Analog can always be recorded again and with minimal effort and loss of quality these days by anybody that has a soundcard and some basic understanding of electronics. Second, even digital format cannot be secure against copying, unless you augment them with some death-corps that kills everybody that bought it immediately after they did.

This is on the same level of small children that think just wanting something enough will make it true. The children have the excuse of immaturity. These people have not.

Nice collection of propaganda-lies you have there. Not credible to anybody with some actual understanding, but apparently you got enough mindless sheep to swallow it.

Really? You presume to teach me CS 101? Pathetic.

Your analysis is shit. I gave this as an example for a larger trend, as in this is 10% of my actual statement by importance.

That explains why it is such a convoluted complex mess. I have been wondering how that happened.

The NSA being able to break into systems without being detected is obviously far more important than your petty need for being able to diagnose problems.

Seriously, I wonder why they have not eliminated the logs entirely. They seem very intent on making then unusable or having the power to hide things in the logs by attacking the log-access binary. Which is one of the primary reasons why binary logs are such a brain-dead idea: You suddenly have to trust a whole lot more things.

That is the other thing. Some physicist did an estimation of the most efficient way to do massively parallel computations, including node speed, communications peed, interconnect length, etc. Turns out the human brain is pretty much optimal in this universe, everything larger or with faster nodes or the like will be performing worse. So it is entirely possible, that human intelligence (such as it is in the average case) is really the best possible.

Exactly. There is not even any credible theory that explains how intelligence could be created. "No theory" typically means >> 100 years in the future and may well be infeasible. It is not a question of computing power or memory size, or it would have long since been solved.

Well, maybe he just realizes that it is unlikely we will get AI like that any time soon and probably never. If you follow the research in that area for a few decades, that is the conclusion you come to. AI research over-promises and under-delivers like no other field. (Apologies to the honest folks in there, but you are not those visible to the general public.)

Seriously, stop redefining my statement. You have no clue whether the threads in my example were needed or bad design. And no, it was not the OS.

Well described.

It may also turn out that when systemd-created problems begin to mount (as they are likely to do), this situation will change.