I wish this was completely true but I had a monitor I brought in from home to use on a work computer, and a mid-stage upgrade within Windows 11 caused the monitor to stop working at its native resolution and only work at 640x480. It was an older monitor and natively DVI on the monitor itself. I couldn't find a ready solution to the problem. Work ended up giving me an extra to replace mine.

I can only suspect that some kind of security setting was not being met, but either way it was really irritating.

It's a goddamn monitor. It should be compliant with video interface signaling standards and to be able to notify the system of what standards it complies with through the video interface itself or with minimal drivers that are basically just an FYI. Even if it has other features like audio capability, USB passthrough, or even some kind of software-based control of the monitor for some other reason, that shouldn't require crazy amounts of permissions to accomplish.

This sort of crap is what I hate about modern consumer electronics. It used to be that most peripherals didn't require much to function, and either software that ran at the user-level with minimal drivers or else features functioned directly onboard said device let it be controlled. This modern era where everything requires copious permissions and comes packed with malware is truly awful. And frankly Microsoft shares some blame here, for even allowing this in the first place.

I'd think that tractor tag-axle replacements could be a next logical step, even with no onboard batteries on the tractor and using an umbilical to the trailer's batteries, or else a small set of batteries in the truck, supplemented as needed by a large set of batteries on the trailer.

The whole process that split AT&T's System V and BSD should bear some weight here, at some point there was an agreement that, once BSD rewrote the few offending portions, AT&T had no claim anymore.

Frankly I'm surprised that the settlement between SCO and IBM didn't include verbiage that this was a done deal with no right for any successor-entity to bring this up again.

There are tons and tons of pathogens with high mortality rates without medical intervention. There are tons of pathogens that only see minimal death rates without active medical intervention because vaccination reduced the penetration that those pathogens have into the community and may have even forced evolution for increased transmissibility in lieu of virulence in order to spread at all.

I didn't get the feeling that the GP post was claiming it was valueless. I got the feeling that the concern was it would get out of the control of its creators, manage to mutate or evolve past a death in five generations, and become a threat to everything we know and love.

I would really prefer the other way around, invoking Windows containers for the few Windows apps that I am stuck running.

Just because someone is stupid doesn't mean that they aren't subject to specific protections under law.

Ernesto Miranda, for whom the Miranda Warning is named, was by accounts a terrible person. Miranda's conviction was thrown out on those technical grounds that his confession should not have been permitted, then he was retried and convicted of the crime without his confession as evidence. Once he was released from prison he died in a bar fight.

The point of protections are that they apply to everyone, guilty or innocent, and are supposed to regulate the way that the legal system all the way from the patrolman to the attorney general behave. That doesn't mean that criminals aren't still criminals, but it does mean that the government has to provide proper justification for its actions against persons. If someone really did commit a crime then the government should be able to show cause, and this keeps everyone else from being scrutinized when the government has no business scrutinizing.

I don't wonder what PJ is up to. I can't even remember the site name/URL that originally was covering that and had forums, but when the password restrictions because utterly freakin' stupid for a new aggregator and discussion forum I just stopped bothering to visit.

I'm slightly more willing to give a pass to Xorg applications because it's not a monolithic environment supposedly under the control of a corporate entity that should be able to enforce its own standards.

of course you have to authenticate, but you run all of the software to administer it on a client, not sitting at the console. The console had only the most barebones capability, usually user management. The tools to administer ran on the client.

...it makes sense to have a headless server operating system when you're mostly running commodity spin-up/spin-down headless servers. Microsoft's server operating system was still largely based on the idea of running on a baremetal self-contained box, even though Microsoft servers had long, long since been used in the virtual machine space. If anything they're quite far behind the curve on this.

The Novell Netware model adapted to the VM era is what makes sense, where the tools don't require logging in to the server at all in order to administer the environment.

IBM is and has always been a services/consultant business, even when they made products.

I'm not so sure about the UI. The history of Microsoft and UI for the past 40 years is that they're happy to abandon their incumbent UI for different. We saw that with Windows 3.x to '95 and NT4, with Windows 98 and the integration of Spyglass Mosaic Internet Explorer, with the transition from Windows ME and Windows 2000 to Windows XP, the subsequent further transition from XP to Windows 7, and the rework from Windows 8.x to Windows 10. We even saw it with Windows 10 to Windows 11.

They change their UI because their customers don't see the OS being new/different unless they change their UI. If the UI looks the same then the average untrained end user doesn't know the difference and doesn't see a value in spending the money to upgrade.

Class rank exists and can be used to determine relative capability though.