While true, that's like saying dirt can't exist without gravity.

Capitalism existed long before markets existed, and markets existed before people did. Fish cleaners staking out a site for their business in the ocean is a market. An amoeba storing resources for later use is capitalism in action. (I.e. it's getting stuff now for later use, accumulating capital.)

Most of the things that people attribute to capitalism are only the property of one "dialect" of capitalism. And corporate capitalism is itself a cluster of dialects, that exist under specific legal constraints, which vary with time and place.

So, yes, markets cannot exist without capitalism, as markets are about exchanging stuff, and capitalism is, basically, "the way one handles stuff". I suppose one could rephrase that as "the belief in the way one handles stuff", which would eliminate amoebas, etc., because they don't practice belief, but the way it's commonly used doesn't seem to imply belief.

While money != capital, capitalism isn't basically about improving anything. It's about using the capital you have (i.e. stuff that's under your control, which includes money) to increase the amount of capital you have. This often improves things for at least some subset of the people, but that's a side effect, and if it's missing, what is described is still capitalism.

It may even be true. But the article I read didn't say how many qbits they had on the chip, or what the error rate was.

There are already commercial quantum computers from DWave https://www.dwavequantum.com/ . They're rather limited, but they exist. But I don't expect them to be general purpose turing complete by 2029 with very many qbits. Possibly by 2035. And I don't expect them to be personal computers until they stop needing to be cooled with liquid gasses (i.e. supercooled). But I wouldn't bet that this will never be possible.

Does it try to make use of ten nanofarad diodes?

I expect that there are groups in the government that have reasonable expertise in that area. But I see no evidence either of what they are (probably some folks in DoD and NSA might have relevant expertise) or reason to believe that they would be tasked with the review.

Well, yes. But this *is* Adafruit's side of the story. Perhaps Flux has some plausible justification, and we just haven't heard it.

(OTOH, there don't seem to be ANY positive reviews of the Flux company or it's products in the comments.)

OTOH, this is an attached processor, so it's in addition to your current setup. Still doesn't sound likely to blow circuit breakers, but possibly equivalent to running two computers.

There are, or at least were, many applications that were useful and on Windows, but not available on Linux or BSD. Switching off of those can be a significant cost. But if you change the underlying system, those probably won't be available anyway.

The core is a LONG way from the surface. Volcanoes aren't. The mantle plumes move slowly.

OTOH, we've known that the magnetic poles were getting ready to switch for decades now. We don't know when or why or how long it will take. This is probably related to that, but we don't have any really good models.

Use BlastEm, a Mega Drive/Genesis emulator by Michael Pavone whose nightly builds recently grew support for 32X, an accessory that bolts two SH-2 CPUs onto the Genesis.

That might be why a feature exists, or maybe even why a particular paid library was chosen instead of another. That doesn't explain why the code is written the way it was, which is the point of documentation. Why the feature exists is the realm of the PRD, not the design doc.

Unfortunately, when they are separated like that each half becomes nearly useless. They need to be merged, though with clear demarcations so you can skip a part that isn't currently relevant.