They don't. You're getting an incorrect impression because you're in an echo chamber.

Slashdot on the whole is full of crusty old greybeards. People who somewhere around the 90s thought Unix was the best thing ever, and since have not found any new development in the industry worthwhile. They still think of computers as "pets", when the industry has long moved on, and think the Unix Philosophy is all there is to making good software.

People more in tune with the times are found elsewhere.

Very easy. See, it's a tower, and towers have a bottom sitting on the ground. So you put your servers down there. And if you want go higher, you put a ladder and have floors inside it.

They also get pretty darn big, so things can be pretty roomy inside.

Microcode is actually very old and existed in the 8086 already: http://www.righto.com/2022/11/...

It also wouldn't have been that big of a deal to include it in Wayland as a formally specified fallback for when shared memory won't work (remote).

It absolutely would be a big deal. Wayland is a protocol specification. This would effectively double the size of it, saying it's mandatory to communicate both with shared memory and via sockets for every program that implements it. That's not really practical because you can imagine that a lot of programs would just skip the second part anyway, since nothing would break on a local desktop.

How does waypipe do when one GUI app launches another?

Perfectly fine. You can try it youself:

waypipe ssh $server weston-terminal

The existence of Waypipe proves Wayland COULD have supported a remote protocol from the beginning.

They explicitly didn't want to. Wayland communicates using shared memory and file handles, for optimal efficiency. What Waypipe does is interposing itself and encoding that stuff into a socket, and reconstructing the shared memory/file handle setup on the other end. That has performance costs, which is why Wayland doesn't do it that way.

Waypipe is only 15K lines of C though. It's not that big of a deal to maintain it.

Fosstodon, just one Mastodon instance seems to have reached around 60K users.

They say their costs are $2K/month and they have two founders who I imagine are the people who manage it, plus moderators.

And I think they're at 60K only because they decided to limit signups.

While I get wanting to preserve old stuff, we all know that entropy is inexorable, and that time gradually destroys everything. No matter how much care is taken, how controlled the temperature and humidity, what gloves people wear, etc, it's absolutely a given that everything present in any museum will eventually crumble into dust, get caked in hard to remove dirt, or break from accidents, careless manipulation, or things like theft and wars. Just look at what happened at museums in Ukraine.

At this point in time, with the amount of technology we have, scanning everything should be a no brainer. This gives tons of options. We can recreate objects when they get lost. We can make reproductions to show the same thing in several places at once. We can make a reproduction and let people touch it. We can make a fixed version to show people what the actual thing in its full glory looked like. We can make replacement parts when something breaks. I'd love to have 3D models available to the people.

And honestly, 12 million sounds cheap. The British Museum is huge. It has 8 million objects. The budget for the museum was £103.4m last year. It sounds like a very manageable amount of money and one that in my opinion is well worth it.

If you want your particular concerns to be taken into account, you have to be visible in some way.

Show up to meetings/events, complain about problems, just reply "Thank you, this fixes a problem I had" to updates to make it clear you're there, pay for paid support, or for the lazy way, enable telemetry.

If nobody knows you're there, you're indistinguishable from not existing. This is especially the case in open source where you can download some software, and use it daily for years without leaving any trace of that anywhere.

My support for Ukraine has nothing to do with US politics. Not everything is about the democrat/republican kerfuffle.

I want a "New New 3DS". It's actually the only console I ever bothered to buy, because the 3D effect is cool.

So I want a new, high res version with a better CPU. The 3DS was an excellent start though, and the 3D camera was a nice bonus.

By the way, for those interested in keeping using it, the 3DS has been well hacked, with various cool features available. But it's best not to update the firmware, since new versions close off the ways the mods have to install themselves.

Facebook makes both hardware and software. Their software sucks, and that's the bit nobody wants. Both because Zuck is not properly in touch with reality, and because there's no way for a huge conglomerate like Meta to make something people actually want.

Second Life and the like still exist and are doing fine, but the tricky thing with them is that they cater to a weird and quirky audience that's not the kind of users anybody wants to bring up in the board room. SL still survives because its weirdness still appeals to people, but is weird enough that few feel like even trying to replicate it. Eg, SL has a very active porn scene. Can you imagine Meta actively catering to that? So they have to work on a neutered, soulless version that ends up boring.

But in the hardware department, Meta is doing just fine. Their hardware is excellent and very competitive, and can be used for a lot more than the "metaverse".

Yeah, poor Putin. All he did was to invade a sovereign country, after assuring everyone he wasn't going to do it.

So why should anyone take him at his word at this point? Anything he promises is hollow. Power is all he understands. He and his people see any attempt at negotiation as a weakness.

There's no point in giving him anything.

And by the way, economy wise, Ukraine is an amazing deal for the US. Russia's equipment is being destroyed. They don't have anything to sell. Meanwhile every bit of US equipment that smashes a Russian invader is an excellent advertisement. The HIMARS order queue is already a mile long, and that's just a single thing. The US will make huge $$$ on this in the end. Not only is Russia getting smashed for peanuts, but in the process the military weapons market shifts towards the US as well.

The real world isn't GTA, though. "Safe cracker" isn't something a person can be tagged with in a police database. If they know somebody is a safe cracker, why aren't they in prison?

No, it's more likely to be more heuristic about it. Like a strong guy, a welder, and somebody with a fast car regularly meet and seem to have too much money to spend. Which of course now is far less reliable and results in hassling a lot of people who just happen to have a skill or interest that's deemed suspicious.

If this malparkage is not remedied within 72 hours, their satellite will be thrown into the Pacific Ocean at their expense.

The right things to reboot are things that had a lot of promise, but flubbed the execution. Either because the plot wasn't quite there, the actors weren't the best, or it needed better special effects.

IMO it's absolutely pointless to reboot a movie that still works today. Eg, there's nothing wrong with Total Recall. The original movie is perfectly watchable as it is.

Now 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea is something that could use a modern adaptation, because that's the kind of idea that could benefit a lot from modern technology. Or heck, Spawn. The concept for the comic is great. The execution is subpar. So a movie that actually made good use of the concept and delivered a coherent plot could actually be worth watching, and would be a welcome divergence from modern Marvel/DC content.

Also, Ghostbusters: Afterlife exists, came out recently and IMO was a decent movie overall.