I'm willing to bet this guy streamed 800GB of 4K content and his 8.4GB is just TCP overhead.

Okay...so it uploaded 8.4GB of data in one week...for 3 to 4 hours per day.

Which is a totally invalid metric to go by. If you literally looked and said "oh...8 gigs....10 days....3 to 4 hours a day...this is bad" and stopped there; then you did absolutely nothing of value.

There is more information needed...specifically; what's the download amount? Yes. It matters. Protocols have overhead. Downloading isn't free. When we take away all the junk the software is doing just to keep the stream going...there is going to be some overhead in just the transmission of the data. You're seeing a very raw number that's going to be "inaccurate" unless you know exactly what it's counting. That's why you also need to talk about how much data you downloaded during that period. Going on your estimate of 28 hours (4 hours x 7 days); a conservative estimate says you will consume around 63gigs assuming 1080p streaming at 5mbps. 8.4GB for 63GB would be a cause for concern...I'll agree there. But what if you're streaming 4K? Well...28 hours @ 40mbps is 504GB. At that amount, 8.4gb of upload is normal; that's less than 3% of the total download and actually kind of small for ovehead estimations.

But instead you just want to make a claim...then back out with some excuse when asked to show data. I'm going to say you've proven nothing.

Show some numbers or gtfo.

Then you deserve whatever happens to you.

Don't patronize that filth.

Well...let's look at the only two ARM platforms that aren't embedded:

Apple
Microsoft

And there's your answer. To the rest of the world....ARM = embedded, so they treat it as such. The Apple M silicon and whatever MS is doing are non-embedded ARM chips that can actually do things; but they're Apple and Microsoft...so there's not going to be much Linux overlap.

What?

That's not how it works. Just because you have stock doesn't mean shit if no one buys it...or you price it so no one can buy it.

The problem isn't they were driven by market forces...the problem is they were a small player; and 4 years ago everyone decided they weren't selling to the small players.

I get you hate Pine....but ending production is not the result of anything but saying "we cannot get parts". They're not protesting component costs...they just can't buy them. No one will sell them...at any cost. It doesn't matter if they keep throwing money at it...they're being told no.

The only joke is how you think any of this works because....you clearly don't.

has $0 real world value.

Our clients are losing customers because they're ditching humans for AI. There's still plenty of people who are anxious to eliminate as many human positions as possible.

Big Tech can say whatever it wants...when every other business is sitting there saying "we're going to go to the company with AI that's 80% cheaper"....well...big tech doesn't control those jobs. Those jobs are getting wiped out.

So...in the land of normal cable television; you can't do this. Cable providers are legally required to offer local channels; and you're legally required to pay the rebroadcast fee.

Streaming providers....last I knew....were supposed to adhere to this too; broadcasters threw a fit at the possibility of people buying packages without locals and cutting them off of all that money.

At the very least...the reorganization might close whatever loophole they're using and you'll have to start paying for locals. This is a shitty system that won't improve for you. Congress approved it and they continue to do nothing about it.

It's memory safe!

The fuel efficiency standards basically demanded large vehicles. You couldn't make something the size of a small Ranger unless it got 70mpg.

The law basically forced them to make larger vehicles.

The consumer market doesn't make them any money. Like...when asked about the consumer markets....not a single company cared. We're too small a market. WD basically said consumers were less than 5% of their income and they dropped us like a bad habit. Memory makers stopped making to the consumer marekt.

Think about that....consumers...are not the primary market. We don't matter anymore.

This is not about a bubble...it's about taking a market away from us. This will never end. They don't want us to have personal computing devices. This is the end-game.

You're just fucked. Once broadcomm took the business over they had no legal responsibility to honor previous contracts.

We're at the point now that business just exists to fuck everyone over. Given a CEO can run a company in to the ground and still get billions in payouts....where is the incentive to do anything? They don't have any. They can be the nastiest sons of bitches anywhere...and the courts will ensure they get paid.

Pretty soon we'll all be paying companies for no reason by legal force.

Yes...I love having a kernel that's 2 years old and won't boot on modern hardware.

Please tell me how Debian and Ubuntu are so superior. Why...they actually started running on my Dell only a year after I actually acquired that. Wow...if it's such the better designed OS then I guess other distros might fall in line....

except Arch booted and ran on that thing day 1 because it's not a whiny little bitch.

If Arch is so stupid why was it the only thing that ran? If the design philsophy is so bad...why does the almighty Debian still have issues on my Dell laptops? Issues I don't have with Arch.

I get it...you don't like Arch. You hate the memes and you don't know how to use it. The problem is you don't really know Linux. No...you don't. Arch isn't doing anything more unusual than any other distro compared to how Linux actually works before you slap all your bullshit on top.

Maybe we need to return to SysV as a society.

Look guy.....Debian isn't any safer from this.

Here's the thing...as everyone pointed out...it's AUR. User repositories. Now...Arch does have a more centralized system...which is good; but Debian isn't immune becuase you STILL have third-party repositories. Those third-party repositories still have the same failure points. Maybe AUR is a little easier...anyone can adopt an orphaned repository; but one might notice a dead repo coming back to life and look at it with caution.

This exact same thing could happen to any user repository for any distro. If you're telling me that you literally just stick to the Debian supplied stuff...then you must not do anything with your system. If you build from source...then I assume you look at every build script and every piece of code to ensure something malicious didn't get slipped in to the last PR.

But since you don't want to read a PKGBUILD....then you're not. So I don't see how you're any safer...unless you just stick to default repos....which means you don't really do anything with your system and could probably function on ChromeOS or Windows.

And that is a problem. You can't run Debian on new hardware.

Why did I go Arch? I had a new laptop. I couldn't even boot Ubuntu or Debian installers. Nothing would boot on that thing because it was too new. I wasn't waiting another year for the LTS cycles to refresh.

That's the other problem with Linux. If you use the standard model....you're SOL on new hardware. Especially if it's a full platform refresh like Dells were last year.