I used to daily drive PC-BSD while it was around: all I needed was web browsing and email. However, the lack of WiFi support did hurt, and so did the lack of direct Steam support. I do hope that FreeBSD addresses these 2 shortcomings and then resurrects PC-BSD for this particular market segment

Well, there are exceptions of CPUs that never got supported by NetBSD - Itanium comes to mind. But the main goal of NetBSD has been to never abandon support for legacy platforms that it once ran on, such as the WE 32000 CPU. FreeBSD and OpenBSD have no such hangups. FreeBSD has pretty much dropped support for things like Itanium, Alpha, Sparc, and MIPS, while OpenBSD, while supporting 64-bit versions of legacy platforms like Sparc & PowerPC, has dropped it for 32-bit

If there is a new emerging CPU, such as RISC-V, then it will get supported at least by FreeBSD and NetBSD. Dunno about OpenBSD

Except it's not 1994, and WIndows 7 was actually on par w/ Linux in most ways. It's another thing that Microsoft started devolving the OS from that point onwards

The way systemd was designed precludes it from running on BSD based systems. They have rc.d, openrc and launchd. In fact, that's one reason that former Linux people who hated systemd moved to the BSDs: this was before Devuan arrived

Maybe. I don't think the EU should just allow US companies to buy limited resources up and prevent domestic companies from competing.

I can't help but think some of the higher ups will have a problem with this. The EU has started making a push for "digital sovereignty" so it seems like it would be a massive conflict to turn over control of key infrastructure like communications to a foreign company.

However, I could see this going through if the deal is for one or more EU companies to use them to bounce their own connection signals. Relying on foreign companies would still represent a potential single point of failure but this also creates the possibility of developing your EU satellites while building out the local infrastructure and accruing users. Using starlink/amazon satellites on a temporary basis would buy EU officials the time to make the economic case to develop EU owned satellites. It would effectively solve the "horse before the cart" issue that comes with deploying expensive satellites with no supporting infrastructure/users.

Security and capability, maybe... but resilience? the only way this is improving resilience is if it's merely a fallback option. Satellite communications are a poor option for dependable consumer communications as it's impacted by the weather and easily jammed. It can only improve resilience if it's solely used as a fallback option.

I suppose it depends if the EU has anything better to do with the spectrum. They will have to pay for it, and will be regulated by the EU, and pay tax there. They can always be cut off later if they don't behave.

The main thing is to make sure that it doesn't stifle EU rivals.

AI is different. When machines started to replace manual labour, people moved into clerical jobs where machines couldn't replicate human thinking. Computers came along and some of those went away, starting with low level accounting jobs like payroll processing. But there were always other jobs to move to, things that could not be automated.

We are now getting to the stage where AI can replace a lot of human thinking. At some point there just aren't going to be enough jobs that can't be automated left.

We have to decide. One option is we move to to low employment economy, ideally something like Star Trek's fully automated luxury communism where all the basics are provided and opportunities to develop one's self are abundant, rather than UBI and people with a lot of time and little to fill it with.

Another is that we just decide not to automate a lot of stuff, and have humans do it. That does mean a lot of pointless work, although arguably that's not so different to how things are today.

Depends on the exact wording, but Android Open Source Project (ASOP) is not shipped on many devices. Most ship with Android, which includes Google Play Services and a load of other proprietary, closed source stuff. So presumably they would need to implement these controls, and I'm sure Google will oblige by offering them to vendors. In fact even if they were not mandatory, I expect vendors will market it as a feature and want to include it anyway.

I wonder how practical this is. It appears that the surface features need to be so small that they couldn't be painted over, for example. Paint adds significant weight to an airliner, but is worth it for the protection and performance it provides.

Kinda sounds like the online businesses need to start being financial contributors to ensure they are not relying on flawed software.

Besides, bugs are finite.

On the basis that all major games get tested on their hardware extensively, because they have in excess of 90% of the market.

They have a card that is competitive with the most common gaming systems in use today. They are improving rapidly. They have a lot of pre-orders because it runs the games that are popular in China well enough, and is competitively priced.

The company that makes it isn't a genocidal totalitarian dictatorship. And even if it was, that isn't an excuse to let them take market share from Western companies.

Gamers Nexus will probably test it soon.

The issue tends to be compatibility with games that aren't popular in China. Basically everyone except Nvidia has compatibility problems to some extent.

News today that a Chinese company has released a GPU that benchmarks similarly to an Nvidia RTX 3060. Coincidentally, the 3060 is the most popular GPU in the Steam charts.

It's designed and manufactured domestically. The rate at which they are catching up is impressive.

And the same thing is true of space. Even disadvantaged by geography.