According to this, 26.06 LTS got a kernel update fix a couple of weeks ago in the middle of July
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+...
Granted, 7.0 is no longer supported so patches are being backported by Ubuntu.
Isn't everyone patching 100s of vulns every month at the moment?
That would be fixed in the current tip of the kernel tree.
But there are multiple supported kernel versions, and many vulnerabilities are not present in the older kernels so those will not be backported. Either the feature doesn't exist in the older kernel, or it isn't enabled by default, or there's a dependency on a newer kernel.
Even if GOG finally released the Linux client today, and it had feature parity with the Windows one, it is because of Valve money that Linux has become such a great gaming platform.
I'll keep buying my games on Steam, at least for now: it is not just a matter of market dominance, but supporting a corporation that is giving back to my community.
The main reason to go with GoG is DRM free games. Every game on GoG is provided DRM free, and you can download offline installers for games and save them. If GoG vanished tomorrow, those offline installers will continue to work. If GoG was served with an order to remove a game from sale and to block people from downloading it, the offline installer will still work.
Steam will get money because there are plenty of games on Steam that will never be on GoG - many games ship with Denuvo and such and GoG will either never get it, or get it a long time later.
I shop at GoG first, but that hardly makes a dent on how much I buy from Steam. You can support both.
The problem is the ease at which we are connected - we assume cellular coverage is universal because everywhere we go there is cellphone coverage basically. And a lot of people who grew up with digital technology never envisioned there are alternatives to not being connected, always.
It happens all the time in BC, because we have a lot of urban trails and parks that are literally minutes from city limits. Cellphone coverage is basically there at the start of the trail because it's barely out of the city.
This ease is deceptive though - you think "oh it's only a few minutes away, we can do it for a picnic!" sort of mentality like it's a visit to the mall. Which is why people are consistently and constantly getting in trouble because they are as prepared as a trip to the mall.
And because the area can be mountainous the cell reception does get spotty so they can find themselves in trouble way too easily because it's just so accessible.
Most other people who never grew up with pervasive digital technology and connectivity will generally want to find more information first because you generally only left with the knowledge you carried with you and what's in your head. So you often researched websites, books, and local information to get more information ahead of time to plan things out because you usually couldn't have this information with you unless you carried it in.
These days if you need information its usually right there on your phone at that instant and your phone serves as the source of information without realizing it has to be connected to do so.
I've done urban trails and they can lead to a false sense of security - even though I live in a city, there are parks and urban trails within walking distance and it's like a little oasis surrounded by major road thoroughfares on all sides. (It's a park, so it's not going to be demolished for construction). If you do them a lot, you might get an impression that the less urban trails just outside the Lower Mainland are the same. We just have a lot of greenery that's easily accessible by walking, cycling, or transit. (Yes, you can get to them by car, but parking is a hassle as it always is in a city). Heck my neighborhood has a little park that's really only accessible by people in the neighborhood - it's really only used by people with dogs because if offers a reasonable area for them to run even though it isn't fenced off by more than a few logs. But the city comes around every month to cut the grass.
Where's the part of small government, freedom, free market, don't tread on me now?
Right there in power, it was all lies and a branding exercise. The right have never held to those beliefs, but it turns out that a lie repeated often enough becomes the truth for enough people that they can get into power.
But you know "both ides" so I voted for the worst. How come on one ever says "both sides" so I voted for Harris?
The latest brouhaha is over hot dogs. Remember way back when - there was a gay couple that asked a bakery to produce a wedding cake, and they refused? It went all the way to the Supreme Court, and they decided that businesses had the freedom to choose their customers?
The current brouhaha is a hotdog vendor setting up shop in a store's parking lot. The hotdog vendor is a Trump supporter and they were politely asked to leave the premises. The right is having a field day with it - despite the fact it's the same issue - the store is refusing to let the hotdog vendor do custom in their parking lot. It's what the right wanted.
But of course, it's "free speech" and "freedom" when it affects them, but not when it doesn't. The bakery not selling a cake to gay people? That's a good thing! Business freedom! A store not letting a hotdog vendor sell in their parking lot? Business... free... dom?
It's extremely funny as the right is trying to bring Harris back - asking where she is and all that and why she isn't in the public eye anymore. It's because when she lost, she became a private citizen again, likely living in California. She doesn't speak out because as far as she's concerned, she's just like you and me. She disappeared back to her own life as ex-VPs do.
Honestly, 12km isn't big in terms of upper air weather - at those altitudes it's more for predicting how the fronts are moving, and those are huge things where 12km resolution is basically good enough.
Weather is based on many models - you have the hyper local models which can predict the weather down to basically a part of a city, then you have models capable of doing weather at a county and state level, then even larger models good for many states to half the country. Sure it's not like Back To The Future part 2 levels of "it will stop raining in X seconds" but weather is too chaotic for that level of precision and what we have going on. Especially with climate change screwing up the models because the models are based on the past, and we do not have models that take into account the warming planet because there is no data there. At best we can predict, then observe, then modify the model as needed.
We should note the improvements over even the past quarter century - back at the turn of the millennium a 7 day forecasts was considered hopeful - the more accurate was around 3 days, 7 days was extending the model far beyond its capabilities and were basically guesses at that point. These days 7 day forecasts are basically accurate, with 10 day and 14 day extended forecasts being reasonable expectations and not even guesses.
Finally, drones are also a lot more expensive than weather balloons. A single weather balloon sounding only costs a few handful of dollars - likely under $50 all in. It's why the radiosondes are almost never recovered - if you find one, they ask you to return them, but they're basically disposable items. They only cost a few dollars to produce anyways. They were designed to be cheap and single use and thus really contain a sensor and telemetry package (no need for GPS - they can range it at the receiver. Sure drones are reusable but they're going to be expensive and likely will take a long time to recover the cost.
I forgot about
Adoption is a function of existing adoption and existing availability of resources.
Extremely good OS' and truly amazing computers have failed, not because they were too expensive or had issues, but because they were perceived to be unpopular OR simply lacked enough software that could run on them.
Extremely bad OS' and truly awful computers have succeeded for the opposite reason.
Linux has an extremely good architecture, at least for machines that are mostly operating with CPUs. When most of the work is done by the GPU, it's less obvious that Linux provides the necessary mechanisms to manage resources and abstract away the hardware specifics. That doesn't mean I expect Linux to start fading, but I don't think a centralised OS is necessarily where things will go. However, the reason it hasn't done better so far is simply because potential users and potential software houses had a negative view of it (even though actual users were almost invariably loving the system).
Windows is crashing now not because it is a slow, bug-ridden piece of spyware (which it is, but users have never cared about that in the past), but because it is perceived in increasingly negative light.
What's wrong with the Registry? Its original intent was to be a database of all system settings. Linux and Unix has had the same thing from the start, except that the Unix/Linux solution is a directory containing a bunch of files (that is,
Now, I'll grant you that most program settings today aren't stored in the Registry anymore, but system-wide settings still are. This is similar on Linux where a lot of configuration stuff is stored within containers like flatpaks.
They can get vertical samples from space and the ground. What they can't get from space or the ground is how the internals of a system evolve.
The problem with "models" in the abstract is that there are a lot of them and some of the time the thing you want is to know the same point relative to the system and not to the mudball.
Lots of people have gut feelings about AI, positive or negative.
Most of the AI research I can see people doing is focusing on single-element problems (such as finding counter-examples to a mathematics hypothesis) or solving very simple engineering systems (at most a dozen or so components). Most of the benchmarks are even simpler (write a short story at the level generally asked in English classes of primary school kids).
As a result, I think that people have developed either a very cynical outlook or a very optimistic look. Neither of these is entirely realistic, for the simple reason that no actual useful problem fits any of those descriptions.
Digging much deeper, I'm finding that when problems get into the hundreds or thousands of elements, even ChatGPT Sol 5.6 and Claude Fable 5 struggle badly to keep track of accurate relationships, let alone any level of detail.
If you want to solve a relatively simple coupled system (whether to use solar panels or direct solar heating, and which side of the house to place them), I'm sure AI is fine. If you want AI to write a five hundred word story detailing a conversation between Kim Possible, Rufus, and a smoked herring, I'm sure it could cope. Just.
If you want it to do anything hard enough that a human could do with an assistant, the tests I've been using (meaningful rather than synthetic problems) suggest you've developed a fantastically expensive blue smoke generator. We are going to need to see the inference engines developed for previous generations of AI, and the reasoners developed for the semantic web, and perhaps tools that haven't begun to be imagined yet, before AI can do anything non-trivial.
Did not know that. Thanks. But fighting online piracy was only the pretext; the real goal was the usual expansion of government (and thus their) power.
And like I said I don't see anyone talking about GOG.
How much of that is related to GOG's reputation for being selective about what games and genres they accept? I get the impression that GOG is a bit more "curated" than some other PC game stores. The curators don't really want visual novels (a style of menu-driven adventure game). And apart from new releases by CD Projekt (which owned GOG before the end of 2025), I suspect that GOG seeks to poach "catalog" games that have already been successful on the competing store Steam as opposed to having a game at day one.
A balloon is not static, it moves with the atmospheric system it is in. Ergo, it tells you how that system evolves. A drone cannot do this.
A drone can stay put, relative to the ground, telling you how a location's atmosphere evolves. A balloon cannot do this.
These are solving completely different types of problem.
You could, of course, construct a hybrid, as balloons are traditionally single-shot. If a balloon carries the measurement gear and a drone capable of carrying that same gear PLUS a deflated balloon, then you can have something that operates as a balloon until it reaches some pre-set location, whereupon the balloon's gas is released and the drone flies the ensemble to a collection point.
Try `stty 0' -- it works much better.
