The kernel is not the operating system, only part of it. As long as Google is keeping parts of their system closed it makes legal sense to subject them to the requirement. As long as they are putting a lot into play services...
Using passport as national ID is common and you could have just googled it to find out like I did https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Exactly, a passport is insufficient as an actual ID as DLs are used today for a number of reasons
The passport is more than sufficient as an actual ID. It is sufficient for ID in all situations. The Driver's License verifies the right to drive, and the ID at the state level. It's the driver's license which is insufficient as an ID, not the passport. The passport always verifies identity.
ID.me is also a private entity which makes it a total non-starter for an actual national level usage.
Welcome to capitalism.
The USA has national ID, it's called a passport. (Real ID was supposed to be a national ID, but it's been watered down so that it effectively isn't one.) The passport or passport card is the gold standard of ID because it verifies both nationality and citizenship.
The USA also has national online ID verification, it's called ID.me. It's shit, but it exists.
Google pulls out of China rather than help China crack down on dissidents and then... they do this kind of shit.
All they showed is that the only kind of fascist regime they want to cooperate with is home grown and white supremacist.
Where Itanic sunk is because Intel were heavily pushing the x86 compatibility of the processor
That and the price per op, which was alone enough to make it a flop.
Redhat will be subject to this requirement because their license places additional restrictions on the GPL and they are therefore in violation and have no right to use the code covered by that license
Girl scout cookies are made with child slave labor palm oil and chocolate. Nothing makes more sense than that they get funding from the baby killing industry.
I would depend on my own hands and not someone else's camera to secure the laptop away from the show floor
All one need do to spot the difference in build quality of a German car is slam the door.
Usually you're slamming the hood though.
It's probably just encrypted, that provides the security-focused part of write protection, at least while it's not been unlocked for boot.
Computers used to have stuff in ROM, stuff used to be a lot smaller, you used to be able to burn your own ROMs and put them on your own boards and have it be meaningful. But none of that is true today of course any more than that you could put a useful amount of storage on a floppy.
Read/write protection on flash is mostly done in firmware and therefore could theoretically be bypassed, I wonder if there were floppy drives before LS120 where that was also true.
It seems like a better solution would be to virtualize the Windows installation in the first place, and then you can do whatever you want with it later if it's compromised. While IT is checking it over to determine whether it's time to revert it to a snapshot or actually try to gather data from it, you can be using an alternate system of whatever kind. The user ought to ideally be basically unaware that anything has happened (why would you boot into Linux when a user is used to Windows?) except that they don't have access to some files.
the amount of original Debian code is very small compared to the amount of code they ship
Debian is four things besides contributors: Governance/COC, license, code, and a network of repos. Debian's code is a tiny amount compared to the overall distribution, but code is not a trivial percentage of Debian.
I'd like to see them be resistant to AI contributions to the code that makes up Debian, I don't care as much if AI is used to do packaging. That's probably a place it could succeed, especially since Debian uses systemd and there will already be unit files which just need paths corrected in predictable ways... and which I will read before bashing init scripts out of other init scripts in five minutes or so.
s/u/i/
Fluid bed pyrolysis isn't profitable, but it is close enough to be viable. If recycling were meaningfully mandated (hahaha etc I know) then it could certainly be done without making plastics outrageously expensive.
On one hand, good luck to us if we try to make that happen, but on the other hand we are not realistically going to stop using fuel or plastics any time soon, the two go hand in hand anyway, and looking the other way accomplishes nothing.
Programmers used to batch environments may find it hard to live without giant listings; we would find it hard to use them. -- D.M. Ritchie
