Remember when Google removed from Chrome the 60 lines of code implementing the FTP protocol because it was a security liability?
Why do we even have Operating Systems? They are too complex and overreaching right? -- Sarcasm aside there's a big difference between removing something virtually no one uses anymore (and was never properly implemented in the first place - Browsers FTP implementations were never complete and always incredibly shit), and removing something that millions of people depend on and use daily.
Your comment is especially silly in the face of what this bug exploits - an WebAPI interface that allows things like background buffering or downloading of videos which means it's literally one of the most used interfaces in modern web standards given how much we rely on media and the background loading of it on the modern internet.
By comparison I'd not opened an FTP site in a browser since the late 00s, and even then that link was usually along side a HTTP link to the same file. FTP became obsolete (as far as browser based implementations) when we introduced dynamic server side processing, and resumable downloads. There's no point serving any consumer interface via FTP, and there's no point in using a gimped implementation from within a browser to do anything that FTP actually excels at.
I'm not surprised FTP was removed, I'm surprised it took so damn long.
You didn't read the whole post: "Set up your TV to simply be a monitor and use a cheap little computer as an HTPC".
No we did read it. We just ignored it for the rubbish suggestion it is. I know it will shock many here on Slashdot but generally people don't want to live lives with an overly complex array of custom intermingled gadgets in the living room. They want to push a button on a remote that auto plays Netflix from the last episode watched, and real complex techheads in the public will push a second button to turn on a soundbar connected via a single cable to the TV.
People don't even have AVRs and 7.1 surround sound anymore let alone fuck around with a turning their TVs into monitors for HTPCs.
Except the barrier to entry is too high. It would be fun if someone could manage to disrupt the memory consortium.
The Chinese are massively rising in the ranks right now. Major PC vendors are currently qualifying CXMT's RAM offerings. But the problem is you're thinking on the wrong time scale. A bubble like this doesn't bring in new players, and indeed the Chinese new players who are entering the market right now actually simply got really lucky as they started building their fabs years ago, before AI was shoved down our throats.
Sorry but that's a load of crap for many reasons.
a) JIT supply chains have been a focus for nearly a century now. COVID changed absolutely nothing and prior to COVID we have also had massive cost demand swings in various industries including tech due to supply and demand disruption.
b) There's very little JIT going on here. JIT is something that affects you in months. The fact that we have had computers delivered at reasonable prices many months after part costs shot up, and pre-builds only really started being price affected early this year shows the industry actually has quite a lot of stored inventory.
b) Even if companies wanted to build fabs now to address this, it's just not possible. These things take years to build, and equally as long to plan. You can't just magic them into existence. Who in their right mind would start a 5 year $bn project to supply a bubble when the payback may not be realised (OpenAI cancelled Stargate a month ago, along with it backed out of a purchase agreement that is equivalent of 40% of SK Hynix supply in late 2026/27). You'd be mad to build anything right now to try and capture the bubble.
There's nothing wrong with the free market here. This is very much the free market working. It's just you have an idealised view that supply and demand can correct each other in real time, when the reality is for many markets the supply side is highly inflexible.
don't expect them to add capacity because if they all agree not to they make more money
While they were indeed colluding, that's not the issue here. The issue is that largely many people think that AI expansion now is a bubble. RAM prices skyrocketed due to demand that may ultimately not be fully realised. Just look at SK Hynix - they just had a massive order cancelled because OpenAI won't proceed with Stargate.
It takes many years to build a new fab. It's not the kind of activity you do during the bubble. It's the kind of activity you hope you did before the unpredictable bubble arrives. There's other parts of the industry affected by AI which are not know for price fixing or collusion who are very much taking the same approach.
No, I suspect it's got more to do with short-term profits and his overall compensation, given he probably wouldn't still be the CEO by the time any new factories were brought online.
Corporate boards typically only reward short-term thinking.
No not at all. Firstly he's been the CEO of Seagate for a decade and there's no indicating that he'll step down in 3 years. On the flip side we have already seen major cracks in the AI industry.
1. OpenAI cancelled a huge order with SK Hynix when they aborted the Stargate datacentre. - A good sign that the industry is cracking under it's overpromises.
2. Wall Street has actively created indices to allow hedge funds explicitly to invest in companies *NOT* in the AI space. - A good sign that the finance industry thinks AI will crash.
3. Even with current prices, fabs takes years to build and many many years more to make an ROI. This is not a decision you make in the wake of a 1-2 year bubble. It's the kind of decision you make when you're sure of demand 10 years from now.
Anyone here thinking long term will not be building anything either. Building something in a bubble that won't be completed until after the bubble pops is the kind of reckless investment that would actually get a CEO to no longer be in their position a few years from now.
If it's not, it soon will be.
Likely just on a different name on the public internet. The USA doesn't control the rest of the world's internet. We saw a similar attempt to take down TPB, that still exists by the way.
FTFS
In addition to domain name services, the order also extends to international hosting providers, who are also ordered to stop working with the site.
Yes, stop working with those anonymous people you may not know because a foreign court with no jurisdiction told you to.
The trouble with money is it costs too much!