I'm a firmware engineer who has been using linux since the 90s.

I haven't read the source code because I haven't needed to.

Was it a hassle having to switch from using SysV init scripts? No, because they kept working...

Was it a hassle when my distro's cli commands changed? Yeah, but for the first few years I just used bash aliases.

In the old system you couldn't have efficient networking; you couldn't accept the connection first, figure out what to do with it, and then pass it off to a process after that. Which is important, because the process that is going to handle the connection might not already be running. There's numerous use cases from that, from servers that do a little bit each of a bunch of different things, to high load servers that need to more manage a lot of processes. A virtual file or pipe just doesn't cut it. And none of the whiners have another solution for that that works better than having a heavier-weight init.

Did the audio stuff piss me off? Yes, but that's actually on the distros for switching too soon without enough resources applied. There were also important improvements in that area that eventually paid off.

"Leftists" are Communists.

Americans "on the left" are Liberals.

They're not actually close at all if you plot politics on a square instead of just on a line. In fact, they're on opposite edges! They disagree about nearly everything.

The normalization of anti-intellectualism is sad to watch. When I was a kid it was only tabloids that used that sort of language.

Oh, wait... The Register did turn into a tabloid. That explains it.

Hrm... it appears all the media has turned into tabloids.

The BBC is no longer broadcast for free all around the world, now it's paywalled. (Semi-literates haven't noticed because they give a couple free articles before the paywall turns on)

Maybe Batboy's grandchildren can clean up the mess.

My wife is over 50 and everybody guesses about 35.

You can also do that in LibreOffice.

"Quantum computing" is usually a bit of a lie where they're actually just running simulations, written in python, that they believe would valid on a real quantum computer.

And usually what they're simulating is not an actual algorithm, but just the quantum computer itself... "this is the random state the outputs take with no algorithm, and look, the output is equally random!"

If you actually understood your link you're realize that is basically says, "Quantum computers help us understand the engineering involved in quantum computing."

What it doesn't say is, "Quantum computers are known to provide a shortcut that bypasses the minimum energy requirements predicted by information theory." And that's what you'd need for quantum computing to be useful.

That makes sense, he's an expert in everything else too, so he's gotta be pretty amazing.

"Everybody" agrees that you can build them using more energy than is consumed by conventional algorithms, and that they can be scaled with enough energy.

The question, the debate, is if they provide a "shortcut" that gets around the minimum energy required for a calculation under traditional information theory. If they always take more energy (as seems likely) then they're useless. But still valid as a type of device.

The default position should be skepticism, because we do have a well-established, well-tested set of theories on the minimum theoretical energy requirements for a calculation. And if every other type of physics there are no shortcuts. And quantum theory doesn't provide shortcuts in other areas; it makes possible some engineering that is otherwise not practicable, but it still follows all the normal energy requirements.

You probably missed the news, but they were cheap because they were selling below cost due to government subsidies in order to capture market share, and the CCP is getting rid of those subsidies.

So you wouldn't save money, you'd only destroy (another) domestic industry.

My 2000 Nissan Quest was a joint project between Nissan and Ford, with Ford making everything except the powertrain and doing the assembly in the US. So the door plate says "Ford."

Great vehicle. Still.

(Yes, of course it has power windows...)

Surely you meant horse paste!

Tip: You didn't understand the statement. The claim isn't that reality has a bias, the claim is that one "side" lies about reality. They spew hyperbole and pretend it's true, and demand others debate with them as if their hyperbole is reality.

If right wingers don't want to be known as -ists, they could just stop spewing -ist nonsense all the time.

Hilariously your own comment added an equal amount to the conversation; and you also just accuse people of "groupthink" without even considering what that means or if it applies in this context. The only explanation is that you know right-wingers are all those things, you just disagree that it's bad. And are dishonest about that.

"which generates electricity without carbon emissions"

Ehh... Until they do resource extraction for uranium without fossil fuels, that's not quite true.

Still better than coal and natural gas fired plants, although all three generation types still require steam turbines.

Speaking of open vs. closed loop systems... how much water does a power plant (nuclear, coal, or otherwise) consume vs. a data center, during normal operation?