This is the prevailing dogma, but has recently been challenged from more recent observations. (In defense of the dogma, we have very aggressively tested for preferred rotations with local experiments involving high energy particles. If there *is* a preferred rotation, its effect is vanishingly small, to the point of being functionally indestinguishable from flat spacetime at local scales, to an astonishing level of precision. This strongly suggests 'sampling error' for JWST data that follows)

https://academic.oup.com/mnras...

Recent large area surveys by JWST suggests that there is a preferred rotational direction and axis to disparate galaxies. Such a finding is inconsistent with the presumption of widescale anisotropy. (But again, that's a very bold statement)

It may yet be ruled out through further observations as a sampling error, but the statement that there are *no* indications isotropy is incorrect. The mere existence of this survey says otherwise.

If there really is a universal preferred rotation, then a 'fuzzy', 'proximal' position could be given as a baricenter. It wouldnt be definitive; too much can happen as random events to compute an exact baricenter, but a statistically probable, proximal area could be defined with some confidence threshold.

Again, *assuming* the JWST readings arent just a sampling error. Which it probably is.

But WE'RE MICROSOFT, and we've decided that YOU WILL GO HERE today!

All our extremely cherry picked analytics data says it's what you really want, deep down, and you KNOW IT, so stop complaining! (Honestly, this is just like the whole "you got rid of our start menu" thing all over again-- Cant you people ACCEPT the new future of computing?!)

1) "smaller" = "Bigger" (in terms of sales, and modern utility. This is exactly what I meant, UV Light has a threshold over which the structures are smaller than the wavelengths you are trying to use to make them. this means you have to use some kind of mask technology, and you get strange quantum effects from the photons doing things photons do when they are restricted by tiny masks.

2) You are forgetting something here, to make a tortured inference that doesnt really fit anyway. Most of the technology used in a fab is either precision electronics (needed to control the energizing source's true positioning to efficiently control its beam), which you can do with less sophisticated chips than the ones you are making. The inverse creates a chicken and egg problem, and is nonsense. You dont need 2nm tech to make 2nm tech. You can make 2nm chips with 14nm ones though. The knowledge of how to make and run fab machines is not to be discredited-- Japan's big LED rise came from a single guy repeatedly rebuilding and tinkering with a vapor deposition machine at a university in the US, where he was treated like ass, because he didn;t have a pHD. DO NOT MAKE THAT MISTAKE TOO.

3) It is not a breakthrough. It's a milestone on independent progress that is occurring at a very quick pace. Again, you are proudly crowing about how big your old growth forest is, while discounting how quickly your competition is doing forestry work.

Correct. The correct response is to massively build out the west's capabilities, and drive down china's market cornering potential.

the problem is that the western countries seem hell bent on doing this the most grift-heavy ways possible, sabotaging every effort, and then wondering why none of those efforts actually produced useful chipfabs--- (at least on one side of the coin)

While simultaneously nodding cheekily to the above, siphoning off every last dollar of grift, purposefully refusing to create local chipfabs (because western workers are too expensive! OUR PROFITS!), and pretending that technological gatekeeping and effective monopolies on supplies are in any tangible way feasible. (On the other.)

China's advancements might be small, but they are meaningful.

Ours? Look big on paper, but mostly just waste time.

I seem to remember a fable about a tortoise and a rabbit written by some greek guy.... Maybe it's my imagination.

UV has a top limit, sure. But homegrowing that tech expands what they can do *now*, builds local knowhow on building fab machines, and primes them to not be as stymied when they move on to building more recent forms of lithography. (You cannot cut off their supply of asics to prevent the manufacture of better fabs)

You kids cant see the forest for the trees, complaining about the saplings china is planting being small, while croaking pridefully about how big your own trees are.

In time, china will dominate chipfab.

JIT emulation is also interpreted code. Not everything that is interpreted code is something high level, like javascript or python.

As for apple's relaxation of interpreted code, they still put the kabosh on most of the more useful applications of it.

Like JIT.
https://oatmealdome.me/blog/wh...

which is why I can still do more with my ancient pixel 4A, than you kids can do with your latest edition ipad/phone.

Apple's walled garden comes at a price.

I'll definitely give you these ones.

PDF manipulation on Android is *TRASH*, and windows 11 is a horrible operating system, that wants very much to treat you very poorly.

Sadly, device makers really *REALLY* do not want to open up their tablets for Linux like they should. Touch interface on linux might be a bit rough, but there are much better tools for office productivity and PDF manipulation for linux, than for either windows or android.

I just dont feel that I would be willing to fork out the extra dough for an apple tablet, where I would lose all manner of other functionality, just for PDF and office tasks.

While support is limited to a handful of models, due to a shortage of skilled maintainers, there are a few android tablets that support lineage OS, or postmarket OS.

Like OnePlus tablets, and Galaxy series tablets from samsung.
Good support from LineageOS for those. The Galaxy Tab A7, from 6 years ago, *IS STILL GETTING UPDATES* from Lineage, for instance.

LineageOS on android devices push their service lives *WAAAY* past what is normally doable. My now very ancient Pixel 4A is *STILL* getting monthly updates via LineageOS, for instance.

"nothing gets fixed"
Say again? What part of Monthly Updates did you not understand?

*IPv6 support*
My phone supports it natively. Dunno what you are going on about.

*superior AI*
This is a matter of personal preference, and I will assert that my preference trumps yours, when it comes to the device that *I* am using. Thank you very, very much.

*Able to play older games*
I can sideload on old android 2.x games on my phone fine-- Oh, wait, I said sideload, Thats a thing apple products cant do, isn't it? Awww.

*Unless they are old mac games, ironically*
Must really suck that Apple wont let you run interpreted code, huh? As for myself, I can run all kinds of stuff. Emulated game consoles, Winlator for older windows titles, BasiliskII for that classic mac experience you mentioned, ADosBox for classic DOS titles, all manner of stuff. Real shame apple doesn't let *ANY* of that play on their products!

*Able to use UNIX tools because its UNIX*
You do know that you can in fact get access to the console, without rooting, on android devices, right? There's any number of solutions for that, of varying quality, from the playstore-- and if you dont like any of those, you can sideload (Ohh--- there it is again!) F-DROID and get direct-compiled FOSS tools.

*Superior Hardware*
In what ways, exactly? They are all sealed units that you cant easily open, All have unremovable batteries, etc. If you mean "It has an alumalloy frame", I hate to burst your bubble, but there are plenty of such tablets in the android offering space. A great many android devices are built around very mature 3D rendering capable graphics chips as well, so when you load up things like Winlator, you can actually do D3D games on them. Not terribly well, since its ARM64 emulating an X86-64 CPU, but good enough for most things that you would actually find pleasurable to play on a tablet form factor.

*High performance graphically and otherwise for the cost*
Look above in the comments for how a savvy buyer saved over 1000$ buying an android tablet, then get back to me on that.

It also blocks all those dildo popup ads when I'm looking for pirate software!

Thank goodness for Texas!

No, SystemD wants to grow up into a REAL despotic gatekeeping process that locks you out of your own hardware for idiotic reasons that only its developer thinks are important, just like the big corporate offerings do!

Its just a humble bit of free software with big dreams! Wont you love it?

[massive sarcasm]

Less smarmy, I feel that this is just more of the same basic mindset from the systemD development folks. They have yet to find an onerous feature that they have been unwilling to embrace, and then angrily evangelize for.

"oh, but California said they want this done-- Nevermind that they explicitly exempted FOSS projects and OSes, That's not important, we are doing our best to satisfy this new legal requirement! Yes! This requirement that we dont actually have to follow! We need to follow it! Yes! We're doing our part!"

https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/...

For clarity.

But CITIZEN! THAT is an OBSTACLE to police investigations!

Don't you want police to investigate crimes!?
You aren't SOFT ON CRIME, are you!? Only criminals would have anything to fear from expanded police powers, citizen!

Remember Citizen, Reauthorizing FISA is absolutely ESSENTIAL to our national security, because the gatekeeping by all those bad, onerous warrants we used to need were OBSTACLES to INVESTIGATION! Those mean, bad terrorists that hate our way of life are aided and abetted by our heroic men and women being stymied in this most important work! (Pay absolutely no attention to what's in the Kissinger memos! We're good guys! You can TRUST us!)

--- That is to say, 'We gotta be able to do this whenever, however, however often, and for whatever reason we want!' Is indeed *exactly the thing they cannot be allowed to have*, (for the very reason you just illustrated), and is also expressly they very thing they have been crying publicly about until govt gave it to them.

There is not a category where it is at once cheap and easy to do, and 'does not get abused'.

That means it cannot be cheap and easy to do, if you want to prevent its abuse.

Not only common, but necessary.

Planets don't just spring into being. They form through gradual accretion, and that is not constrained to just one big thing eating all the other little things. Its a bunch of little things all eating littler things, getting bigger in the process, and then colliding with each other as their orbital mechanics change from the changes in mass and angular velocity/momentum.

Most models have things forming in the outer solar system and falling in, as they get heavier and slower-- or things in the inner system getting ejected out after such a shift, plunging toward the sun, picking up a lot of speed, then getting slingshotted out.

This is why there are so many rogue planets floating around in deep space. (On the average of 20 per star, in the milky way galaxy.)

Until things settle down, early solar systems are very chaotic places with lots of collisions, things falling into and out of orbits, getting shot out of the system, all the while getting bombarded by highly unstable and variable/unpredictable solar radiation effects from the host star being turbulent.

Trick question-- There is nothing "good" about social networking as it currently exists.

Moreover, the very same people here who are wanting to shut down child access, are the same folks who have been doing all manner of organized child exploitation through government systems abuse.

You seem to think that just because one thing is bad, the other must be good.

The reality that none of the things are actually good, seems to escape your grasp.

I am being pragmatic, and suggesting instead that No Force On This Earth will be successful in stopping the kids from their favorite haunts, and that the effort to try to shove that genie back into its bottle is pointless.

The only reason anyone who understands the problem would try, is if there is some other ancillary goal they have in mind, with the impossible boondoggle that looks good to rubes as a cover.

There's no way to make social media safe for children. The only way to make children moderately safer from this, is to completely outlaw the very concept of social media as a service. Even then, kids will form them on their own, and the very same things will be discussed in them. Don't think for a minute I dont understand that this happened with IRC in the days of yore, and still happens today on services like Discord.

The genie will never go back into that bottle, short of civilization regressing to an earlier state.

Dont be silly!

This is a truly visionary, and ambitious programme undertaken by the british PM!

By restricting the information and content young people have access to, they can double down on state owned television and enforce messaging that favors them!

It'll only take half a decade or so to come to fruition, but it'll work, I'm sure of it!

There's no way those kids will use stuff like proxy servers, VPNS, fake identities, or TOR exit nodes! If they just block social media, they can shut down all those bad dirty ideas! Surely!

It has *much* more to do with the memory card's erase block size.

NTFS wants to use a 512 BYTE or 1kbyte allocation unit size. (Dont believe me? Right click your system volume, and choose properties. See what your allocation unit size is.)

This size was selected because it is 1:1 the sector size of original winchester style hard disk drives, which makes those sizes the most efficient to transfer to or from the disk controller.

Modern drives tend to favor 4kbyte sized sectors, but still emulate 512 BYTE ones.

FAT had cluster (allocation unit) sizes quite a bit larger than this. Usually between 4k and 16k, but 32k and 64k clusters are supported.

For early flash memory cards, 32k and 64k cluster sizes were 1:1 what the eraseblock sizes of the flash array were, meaning having the filesystem use that size gave the best possible efficiency with the device controller.

SDHC and SDXC devices though, have erase block sizes that (cough), 'greatly exceed' (cough) what FAT32 can support.

ExFAT however, happily lets you use cluster sizes in the MULTIPLE MEGABYTES size range, allowing the flash makers to still have 1:1 cluster->erase unit parity, and maximized device IO efficiency.

Your camera formats that card as ExFAT because that's what the SDCard Assn demands.

The SDCard Assn demands it, so that they can reliably claim the write speeds written on the top of the card.

NTFS will annihilate flash cards with write amplification, and have piss-poor io performance writing to them.