Actually, yes. The improvements and speedup to swap in 7.0 and later would have their biggest impacts on the machines that swap the hardest with the least CPU/bandwidth available... aka the stuff that's getting dropped. I may still do up a 6.17 vs 7.0 test on my Soekris 486s just to see what could have been for giggles.

I used it to build itself, kernel and userland, so not testing for anything specific but letting it chew the fat at 100% load for a couple weeks continuous usually flushes out most issues if there are any at the kernel level?

The code has been actively tested on real hardware recently, as noted I've got two 486s that I've been abusing with modern Linux via Gentoo for years, both have been active in the last 6 months, and I'm not the only one poking around, but there aren't massive numbers of us for sure. If it wasn't getting feedback, there wouldn't be any friction to devs touching support for later generations 'cause they wouldn't know they've broken things for the older kit.

To me, the 'fix' seems to be spinning up a new arch branch, call it x86-old or whatever. Use that to bring up a clean start 386/486/etc arch so that people playing in the main x86 area aren't tripping over the old code. We've got all the info needed to do so already sitting there in the src. Now, if there are enough users left to drive such a branch, dunno. I still play with my Soekris 4501 and 4801 as a hobby but I'm no longer using them in production, and my C knowledge isn't good enough to make this happen.

Actually, it has to be 'substantial human input' to be considered valid. Reworking prompts, and then doing photoshop tweaking to the resulting image is not enough to clear the bar to get copyright protection for example. Another that's been through the process, using AI to generate a book and then doing some light editing on it, the 'author' was allowed to claim copyright on the layout, but not the content after appealing multiple times and trying to claim an ADA exception. So if AI spat out 100 lines of code, and you touched up a few... unlikely to be considered enough to qualify for copyright. If you modify it enough to clear that bar... what did the AI really do?

So, in the US machine generated content isn't eligible for copyright. What does that do to a project under GPL or other licenses? Does the license become unenforceable once a certain threshold of non-copyrightable content is in the project?

Those words don't go together as a sentence like you think they do. Now, if you want to talk about a mach microkernel with a userland originally derived from FreeBSD you'd make more sense. No linux involved.

So... in the spirit of openness they'll release the training material list, right?

Free, as long as you have an internet connection to receive certificate updates to allow you to decrypt it. That's the bit that's driving this.

If I need an AI assistant to "download and launch games" then you need to fix your UI design Microsoft.

Most people that have solar on the roof are just setup for grid tie, so when the power goes out, their system shuts down as well, so they're just as in the dark as those around them. Solar + battery that can run independent of the grid is far rarer due to the increased install cost and concern over batter replacement costs down the line.

VDO.Ninja is a suitable backend for this, video goes point to point, the backend just does the initial signaling between endpoints. You can also self-host the backend if you want. Works pretty much anywhere a browser has permission to see a camera.

Or require DNSSEC, already supported by the OS?

And then access to that repository becomes a gatekeeper for offering anything for those platforms.

You can disable it, today. As per the EU directive, you won't be able to disable it on new vehicles going forward. There are a lot of safety features available, I use many, but I also prefer to have control over them which I currently do.