Yeah, but the posting said, for Linux, "We are using RDRAND, but it is being mixed in with other entropy being gathered from the system"

If you gather entropy from the environment, like noise from certain chips, start ms time since some last connection, keyboard/mouse movements, etc, that, alone, is random enough for most any use case. And since they are applying that on top of any hardware random number generator, it ensures that it is even MORE random and prevents hardware companies from cheating.

And another +1 Informative! You are on a roll :)

>"The legal jurisdiction for regulating time comes from Article I, Section 8, clause 5 that gives the Congress responsibility to regulate measures, metrics, weights, etc.

Ah, OK. It is a bit terse, saying:

"To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin, and fix the Standard of Weights and Measures"

Playing devil's advocate... To me, it pretty clearly means weights and measures as it relates to coins/money. Otherwise, it would be a separate clause. But one might interpret it as stand-alone. Also, I would consider time a measurement, although which time zone or DST isn't really a measurement, but an offset. We are still using the same units and measurements/values of seconds/minutes/hours/days/weeks/months/years/etc.

Anyway, +1 Informative!

>"It's pretty obvious that official times are related to interstate commerce, so you'll never arrive at the 10th Amendment on this issue."

I don't think it is "obvious" at all. States charging other states taxes or erecting tariffs would be obvious. States not accepting money from other states would be. Natural resources like rivers running through multiple states would be. Time offsets? It doesn't stop, tax, or hinder commerce. Certainly far less than "blue laws", or "dry laws" which were decided to be Constitutional. We already have different time with time zones. One could make an argument far more for time controls than for healthcare or education or hundreds of other abuses of the fed, for sure.

Like I wrote before, if you try hard enough, you can somehow come to a conclusion that just about anything can be grabbed under the Commerce Clause, completely nullifying the 10th Amendment.

>(And frankly if you can't figure out that much, maybe talk less when politics comes up?)

Seriously?

>"Always seemed weird to me that the States were hampered by Congress from deciding on these types of things."

It isn't just weird, it isn't supposed to be that way. See the 10th Amendment (Bill of Rights):

"The powers not delegated to the federal government by the Constitution, nor prohibited to the states, are reserved to the states or the people."

One of the simpler parts of the rule book to understand. And, yet, somehow, it is just ignored. It is pretty clear that time keeping is not delegated to the Federal government by the Constitution (nor is education, child care, health insurance, marriage, speed limits, retirement, gun control, or countless other things). Therefore, the powers surrounding it should be left to the States (or the People, meaning completely uncontrolled by any government). The most popular way around it is invoking nonsense about "interstate commerce clause", effectively trying to find a loophole to make just about anything a power of the Federal government.

Oh well.

That is a compelling argument for more granularity. Of course, the argument against is going to involve things like visiting a friend or family gathering (wedding, funeral, reunion, dinner) or business (with fixed working hours for some service or job interview) in your same State/Province, not that far away, and suddenly you arrive at the wrong time with potentially disastrous consequences :)

I get that might be more expected near a State border or time zone border. But if we end up with a mosaic of different times in non-border areas, it really could get hella confusing.

In any case, the State/Province should be able to handle this far more effectively than an over-reaching Federal mandate (which is the whole reason most power/control should be at lower-levels of government).

>"Ah, like how the Yukon went to permanent DST a few years back and most of BC going to DST this year. Of course in BC, it is up to individual towns etc to decide and along the east they're still debating it."

I hope this legislation does pass. But I also hope that it doesn't get more granular than whole States. Having just parts of States be different (counties/towns/cities) will start to get quite messy and confusing. Nobody will be able to easily keep track of that.

>"Neither the article, nor its source, explain what this site is for, why anyone would go to it, why a website would cost so much... nor anything else."

Yeah, I don't understand why so much money would be needed for just a "web site". More must be going on.

>"I rely solely on my distros to provide updates, including things like kernel firmware. Though I have no idea what the fuck kernel firmware is or does."

The idea is primarily for certain non-open-source firmware, like the BIOS/UEFI, and closed firmware that resides inside controllers that are supported by Linux (like RAID, iLo, higher-end network cards, various controllers, WiFi, etc) to have a central, vendor-neutral site. Various firmware may or may not be part of your distro, depending on its stance on closed-source binary blobs and what type of hardware. As far as I know, no distro has motherboard firmware available has part of their system, just the fwupdmgr program, itself. The actual place that the fwupdmgr downloads from is, indeed, the Linux Vendor Firmware Service (LVFS). It has been around a long time. I have used it several times to check and update the firmware on my various Linux ThinkPads.

>"Marketing was NEVER going to allow units like mi/kWh or km/kWh to be used for flashy new EVs, since those (single-digit!) numerical values would be so much smaller than [ICE] per gallon figures."

I was wondering why they used kWh per distance instead of distance per kWh. The Ariya uses the latter on the dash and manuals, as do most of the postings I see from other EVs. I actually had to convert the article's strange backwards units so I knew what they were talking about.

>"It looks like mainstream EV tech doesn't leave much left on the table for efficiency while also providing amazing performance, and so it takes some questionable choices to make a more efficient EV."

Correct. Motors are already very efficient (80 to 90%) and newer designs can eek out only a few percent more. Weight and areodynamics are all that really remain. Weight is always something you can play with, but the materials start to get extremely expensive when replacing steel (which is cheap and very strong). We understand areodynamics quite well at this point, so that isn't going to get much better without extreme sacrifices in things drivers want- space, visibility, headroom, etc. So EV efficiency is hardly worth worrying about.

What can be improved a lot is range, charge speed, cost, and safety. All of that comes down to battery technology. And there are ongoing improvements there with lots of possibilities. It wouldn't surprise me in 10 years if newer EV batteries double their range (power per volume/weight), double their charging speed, and become far less volatile. All while possibly having even more service life and costing considerably less.

Thanks, +1 Informative :)

>"Tesla accomplished this by building a tiny two-seat robotaxi with no steering wheel, no pedals, and a sub-50 kWh battery pack."

It still HAS steering and brakes/etc. Not having steering wheel/column or a few pedals isn't that significant, it would only matter for weight, which neither has much of. Being small, small battery, low-power motor, and aerodynamic are the primary factors in being so efficient in this case.

My tremendously more powerful, dual-motor, much larger Ariya rarely gets better than 263 Wh/mi (and usually much worse), so at least double the power usage. But it also has all laminated insulated glass, leather seating for 5, double moon roof, much more storage, 4WD, more ground clearance, 87kWh battery, probably more safe, etc.

Anyway, I don't think electricity efficiency is likely the most important factor for a cab vehicle. Charging speed and frequency and vehicle reliability are probably far more paramount, since time is money.

>"Already patched with the kernel released for Fragnesia in RHEL"

As expected. But not everyone has a system that is ready/able to be updated or can be rebooted. And tons of people use non-RHEL enterprise Linux. For those cases, a mitigation (if possible) is important.

>"This bill doesn't kill DST. It allows states to make it permanent, if they want to."

I came to post the same thing. This: "The bill would allow U.S states to decide whether to "exempt themselves" from Daylight Saving Time, according to the article." That is 100% INCORRECT. States can ALREADY exempt themselves from Alternating Daylight Saving Time and stay on permanent Standard Time. And only two do (Arizona and Hawaii). What they cannot do is opt for permanent (year-round) Saving Time, which the bill seeks to allow. And that would be a very good thing to have. Then States can decide which of the three time schemes works best for them.

What we would probably find is that States will mostly decide based on neighboring States and we will see "clumps" of areas on one scheme or another. Latitude will probably be the most determining factor, with more northern ones leaning towards Alternating Daylight Saving Time (current scheme) and more southern ones leaning towards permanent Saving Time. The two that are on permanent Standard Time will probably remain on it and no other State change to that. Would probably take several years for things to sort out after trials and such.

>"Open source proving its worth once again."

Indeed it is. Open source, so these are being found by many and mitigated and patched quickly. Close-source OSes are probably full of even more such bugs/flaws, with far fewer eyes on them. I read about zero-day vulnerabilities in MS-Windows all the time, that affect current through old versions, found by few, possibly in-use for long periods of time. And that shows that "security by obscurity" either isn't working well for them, or that there are so many more bugs/flaws waiting and just found more slowly.

And there are far other more "worths" of open-source than just security; like being free, licenses that keep it open and free, not controlled by one entity, able to fork, community involvement and improvements, etc.

If you look at the history of highly-used open-source OSes vs. highly-used non-open-source OSes, I think you will find open-source's security record is, overall, as good to considerably better.