Right but Torvalds point is still important even if the work still has to be done. Are there changes the hardware vendors could make to do a better job of catching some of these things up front? Do they need to reconsider some aspects of their architecture with the security first mindset? If it's purely theoretical does the code get written but not implemented until it's needed? Because it's also true that if we have to implement software fixes that in some cripple the hardware after release you're not really getting what you paid for anymore.
So, even if the end result is it sucks and this is the way it needs to be done, I think it's important to have the conversation and reevaluate the way it's being handled rather than just saying this is how it has to be done.

Yeah save games for things like fall out in Skyrim can also get really huge. It's because you don't continually save over the same file you create a new save every single time and there are also usually several Auto saves and a couple of backup saves. This is how steam has been doing it forever you have cloud saves but it only backs up the last few not all of them for each game.

The article cites multiple articles. The relevant article for said claim is:
https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.adh9444

Not sure what you are talking about Steam for Linux is extremely stable and usable. You may not get the same performance you got in windows, but it's totally usable. Both AMD and Nvidia provide functional and regularly updated drivers.

I think they're gripe is less that you have to go into the bios than the complexity of getting into the BIOS these days with uefi+secureboot+fastboot for short boot up times. It's not so complicated though if you just hold shift when you click restart, All you have to do is click advanced and then select use a device or enter uefi firmware settings.

I've been using Fedora forever, But the last few revisions having a very painless install on several different laptops and desktops. You should consider trying it if Ubuntu isn't working out for you.

I think the internet archive is more deserving of a $250 2TB 2242 NVME drive anyway. . . Which is about the same size and better in almost every way.

This is why I would have expected to find that programming helps people learn to apply the mathematics that they've learned elsewhere, as opposed to learning the mathematics outright. Learning to program isn't going to teach you the principles of geometry you need to apply to performing operations on shapes(though it could prompt you to go learn it yourself), but will help you use them when they would otherwise whither in the back of your brain.

I miss the days when we all thought a data driven internet powered utopia was on the horizon. . .sometimes feels like the optimism all but gone unless it's a keynote being delivered to investors to drive funding.

We had a 2 hour sales pitch from Microsoft on their recently acquired Metaswitch products. They talked at length about moving the ecosystem into azure, But were clear they couldn't do it today, And we're looking at 12 to 18 months timeline. I remember thinking it was odd that one of their reasonings for this was that they were concerned about being able to provide 99.99% up time. Resource availability would seem to be a good reasoning for that because the phone switches require more dedicated resources than most other applications I have virtualized.

I don't understand why people are so blinded with hatred over NFTs that they can't wrap their head around the potential for legitimate uses of NFTs that are not scams or absurdly priced worthless digital trinkets. maybe some jealousy for not having banked off of it? Or just a jump on the internet groupthink bandwagon?
If NFTs are ever to move beyond this gimmicky phase, players who are interested in realistic applications, I think we need players like Salesforce to be in the game.
Airlines are planning to use them for to let tracking and transfers: https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/ujvqzw/the_future_of_airline_tickets_nfts_are_here_to
Maybe You still think it's a bad idea, But the intent is to use the technology for a genuine benefit.

Verizon has not shut theirs down. Current Date is December 31st 2022 but in 2019 they stopped provisioning new devices.

https://www.verizon.com/support/knowledge-base-218813/

I found some of the communications about these shutdowns very inadequate. They oftentimes read as though they are removing the ability to provision phones and make phone calls rather than decommission the hardware itself. If it was as simple as simply replacing the equipment or adding a dongle it would be no big deal.
I have quite a few CDMA devices that do NTP and network timing, and it's not the cost of replacing the equipment that's the problem it's the thousands of dollars a month of roof space for antennas that I'm going to require in order to get a GPS signal because it won't penetrate the data center. . . That or drop my stratum level.

You have an LTE phone. The 3G shutdown should affect you minimally and most likely only in situations where you're at the edge of coverage or roaming and end up connecting to 3G. Also other carriers have also announced that they're going to decommission 3G, So swapping carriers won't buy you much time.

We just need to stop meandering away from that path/ignoring the areas that need tweaking in the modern world. . .