One U.S. ISP that technically blocks inbound TCP over IPv6 is T-Mobile Home Internet (fixed wireless). The gateway appliance included with the plan offers no way to forward a port to the subscriber's computer. (Source) I've read that most major U.S. ISPs threaten to disconnect a home subscriber for running a publicly accessible server. (Source)

One large legacy network in the U.S. is Frontier fiber, which is still IPv4-only in 2026.

When CUDA started taking off we had ATI hardware, to support their open source pledge, and looked into ROCm.

Just getting the drivers to build on EL-anything was an extreme effort, and it wasn't my first rodeo.

Without betraying confidences, I was told second-hand that there were only ten people on the GPU driver team across all platforms and that they were doing their best and not sleeping enough as it was, with Compute way behind gaming bugs on the priority list.

I couldn't independently verify of course but the theory fit the data.

I immediately empathized with the suffering of the devs and went out and bought nVidia cards, annoying binary drivers and all.

Since then I've felt like that some bean counter at AMD wrote nVidia a trillion dollar check.

If you're not a tiny company *overstaff* your engineering departments so you don't miss new opportunities as they arise. The opportunity costs exceed the opex costs.

RCS isn't a good standard. It was so crappy that Google essentially bought it, added the minimum necessary to turn it into an acceptable messaging platform and made their proprietary version (as opposed to the original GSM's proprietary version) their messaging platform. Er, their fourth (fifth?) messaging platform.

Same here but this lack of support will matter much less than dropping i486.

There are still embedded systems sold today that only meet i486 specs. I don't use them but some industries do.

Sure a $12 ESP32 can handle those tasks but it's a revalidation thing.

Not that anybody from those vendors stepped forward to maintain a tree.

OTR might be small enough.

The Axolotl Ratchet is much better but perhaps too big for SMS.

TextSecure probably would have offered it were that feasible.

Of course if you can arrange one-time pads you're 1:1 at 140 characters.

Why? If she's an experienced speaker I suspect the VP of strategic alliances for a multinational private equity holding company is used to talking to a very specific type of audience. We even have a phrase for that that comes from a similar type of speaker: "preaching to the choir."

The real hilarity is that someone from a humanities college thought she'd be a good pick.

That, by its very definition, is an area where AI should have very limited use

The definition of AI is essentially:

"to proceed on the basis of the conjecture that every aspect of learning or any other feature of intelligence can in principle be so precisely described that a machine can be made to simulate it."

So no, by definition, the stuff those humanities students do is a prime target. We used to think that the creative humanities stuff was going to be really hard, maybe the ultimate goal for AI, but it turns out it's not.

They aren't creating the vulnerabilities, they're finding them and creating exploits.

They've created nothing new, just looked around an found markets they could cannibalize.

Ah, they've added competition. Terrible.

Many printers, including Bambu Labs', don't have endstop sensors. They run to the end and detect the stepper stall. They're direct driven by the stepper motors and don't have the power to "strip belts or cogs."

Hopefully. Nothing livens up driving like that surge of adrenaline you get in front of a long line of cars when you've stalled your cranky old beater and aren't sure it's going to start again. Something to provide the smell of a burnt clutch would be great too.

I rememeber when I was a kid my father telling me about how they used to stick cards in their spokes so their bikes sounded like they had motors, but then they realized it was slowing them down and stopped.

Nostalgia sells. Even better, it sells best to the people with most of the money.

Of course they are. People who know that the team bus got in late last night, Joe stubbed his toe, whatever. Or just "insiders" who actually know something about the sport and aren't just betting on their favourite team to win the way they do every weekend.

Most betting on things that aren't completely random is going to have a strong element of fleecing the casuals. The actual insider betting (and trading) is a gradient with a somewhat arbitrary threshold too.

If the rates are similar to other forms of gambling than the majority wouldn't be due to insider information. Edge cases will be, but unless you think they have inside information about the weather, the rates between Polymarket and regular gambling wins are relatively consistent as detailed in the article.