Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Positive fallout? (Score 1) 187

Every self-respecting organisation will now want to open and verify their purchases to see if there's no tampering being done with the hardware in manufacturing or in transit. I hope this will boost the 'repairability' factor needed. One can only verify a product if it can be opened and put together again. Like, for example, the fairphone. While this has been a human tragedy for all the victims involved, maybe there will be some positive influence on the long term?
Yes, I'm an optimist...

Comment Manual override is missing from all datacenters (Score 0) 37

The real existential threat is that all datacenters are hard for humans to get into and very easy for super-intelligent AI with zero-day intrusion capabilities to take over. It is very easy to create manual overrides to turn the redundant power and redundant connectivity off manually - without any digital tools - if we want to. But nobody seems to realise the importance of this manual override.

Comment Sry to stop the speculation (Score 1) 104

I'm afraid the reason is less exotic as many posters hoped for ;) NASA response: “A pulsing sound from a speaker in Boeing’s Starliner spacecraft heard by NASA astronaut Butch Wilmore aboard the International Space Station has stopped. The feedback from the speaker was the result of an audio configuration between the space station and Starliner. The space station audio system is complex, allowing multiple spacecraft and modules to be interconnected, and it is common to experience noise and feedback. The crew is asked to contact mission control when they hear sounds originating in the comm system. The speaker feedback Wilmore reported has no technical impact to the crew, Starliner, or station operations, including Starliner’s uncrewed undocking from the station no earlier than Friday, Sept. 6.”

Comment Re:The interesting part would be the reason (Score 1) 26

My 2 cents: this project was initiated as a result of the Apple Vision Pro launch. Often Apple gets it right. And then Meta should have been ready quickly to compete. However, Apple Vision Pro is less successful than expected, hence the change in strategy. I presume Apple is working on a cheaper replacement for the Vision Pro to make it sell more, but the biggest issue is (lack of) use cases outside for movie watching on an airplane. The Meta Quest 4 is simply a better product now; cheaper, lighter and with more use cases (gaming, entertainment....). Meta probably better focuses in keeping it light and cheap and just gradually improving it till Apple delivers really something worth copying ;-)

Comment Historic context (Score 1) 104

We have to remember where this all comes from. The original reason why Red Hat did choose a specific kernel release back in the old days was simple: some releases where good, other ones where not that great and prone to crashes and instability. That was 25 years ago... and since 20 years we have very stable linux releases, and the backwards compatibility requirement for userspace in Linux development is holy.
Still the Red Hat leadership has been stuck with their heads in the past.
As this paper rightfully says: delivering the least stable kernel with an - ironic - enterprise label.
It has turned into a commercial differentiator without any technological merit - on the contrary, it's a serious disadvantage of the distribution.
When we discovered that Red Hat still applies a broken philosophy regarding major OS upgrades and provides a non-functional leapp tool for in-place upgrading, forcing enterprises to fall back to reinstalling thousands of servers, we set to work. And we build Project78 to prove it can be different. Upgrading Red Hat 7 to Red Hat 8, or CentOS 7 to Rocky 8, or CentOS 7 to RHEL8, can now be done in a massive, predictive way too. We prove the point it can be different. As Linux is supposed to be. I hope Red Hat will get their act together and fix these 2 large shortcomings of their distribution, because they are not delivering the experience as it should be. More information about our Project78 here.

Comment Re: Why would you need that? (Score 1) 20

Indeed, LEAPP in itself is not great. But our Project78 software builds upon it to deal with its shortcomings for large scale enterprises. We have already upgraded thousands of heterogenous Linux servers at our customers and performed +10.000 lab upgrades to validate our custom recipes dealing with most common third party software. Here you can find out more: https://www.project78.com/ And the differences between LEAPP and Project78: https://docs.google.com/spread...

Slashdot Top Deals

The world will end in 5 minutes. Please log out.

Working...