In other news, we are now measuring chips in units of "gigawatts". About as smart (or less) as measuring light bulbs by wattage instead of lumens. When newer light bulb tech came along (fluorescent, LED), the advertised wattage figures became fake and now must be supplemented with the actual wattage and luminescence in the fine print.

The same would seem to apply to chips. If they want to measure AI chip deliverables in wattage, AMD could simply unload their warehouses full of old Bulldozer chips to meet the requirements. That would consume the requisite wattage without generating much useful work. Instead, they should measure chip delivery commitments in TeraFLOPS, or Giga-inferences per second, or whatever performance criteria is critical to their needs. Measuring deliverable of anything by wattage is dumb for anything other than electrical supply. Especially for chips, where every generation is practically guaranteed to deliver more performance per watt.

"You don't immigrate from Puerto Rico." I was going to say the same thing, but you already have it covered. Puerto Rico is a US territory, and Puerto Ricans are American citizens.

The quoted SFGate article now says "moved" instead of "immigrated", so they must have received pushback on that also.

Not explained is how these two were able to pilfer the contents of all those "secure" PO boxes. I can only assume that one or both of them worked (or contracted) for the Post Office. Or they have a friend on the inside, but that seems less likely, given the petty nature of this crime spree.

Can someone give me a quick recap of how the open source CentOS project (Community Enterprise OS) became the property of Redhat / IBM?

The whole freaking point of CentOS was to provide an independent open-source version of Redhat Enterprise Linux. Basically compiled from the same source, minus any restricted files such as trademarked graphics. The same source code, compiled with the same compiler, using the same compiler options, then distributed for free. Binary compatibility guaranteed (as much as possible for open source).

At first Redhat said CentOS Stream would become a beta version of RHEL where new features could be tested without impacting commercial customers. Now they are just sh*t-canning CentOS altogether.

I know there are other recompiled versions of RHEL out there: Scientific, Alma, and Rocky (the last time I checked). But this whole co-opting of CentOS by Redhat makes no sense to me. Why would the CentOS governing board allow this to happen? Specifically, who voted for it?

"There is no privacy. Get over it." - Scott McNealy

Nothing in the cloud is ever deleted. Ever. Once it's in "the cloud", you have lost control of it forever.

You can expect the most embarrassing "deleted" photos to show up at the most awkward times. Count in it.

2025!? That's like, the day after tomorrow!

Seriously, though, they are claiming 2060 +/- 35 years. That's a pretty big error band.

Yes, and those applications ran on the remote host, not on the terminal. The terminal simply displayed the characters that were sent to it, and interpreted the few escape sequences that it understood. The application on the host understood that the terminal had an 80x24 grid on which text characters could be displayed, and sent the escape sequences to position the cursor where it needed to be to draw the next character. The terminal didn't know ANY of the underlying game logic except how to display the text stream and interpret the embedded escape codes.

I think if more CompSci courses required an assignment to "Write a simple Terminal Emulator" that more people would understand this basic concept. If they don't understand such a fundamental thing, how can they understand what a compiler does, how caches work, or why hexadecimal is a useful notation? Ugh.

Bash is not part of the terminal emulator. Auto-complete works just as well on an actual VT100 serial terminal as it does in PuTTY, xterm, or any other terminal emulator.

In order to add the functionality that the OP is asking for, there would have to be a whole new API between the terminal and the host that the emulator could call when needed. Basically you would be turning the terminal emulator into a text-based OS-agnostic system browser and launcher. Good luck designing that, and then getting support for the API integrated into the tty subsystem in Linux, BSD, whatever Apple currently calls their stuff, IBM iSeries, IBM z, etc.

We shall be eagerly awaiting reports on your progress!

I keep looking for signs that this moron "inventor" is joking or pulling some kind of scam. But he comes across as completely serious. And what is worse, the reporting here and elsewhere is also taking his "invention" at face value.

What kind of idiot would would wear a device that will blow his brains out if he loses a video game? Everyone loses video games! That's the whole point! Do these idiots not realize that "respawn" has no meaning in the real world? Dead is dead.

I mean, I guess it would have some positive benefits for society, if not for the gamers themselves. Average IQ would be sure to rise if this device caught on and started wiping out entire battalions of morons. And the gamers' surviving family members would become richer from all the product liability lawsuits they are sure to win.

So sure, idiot gamers, wear a VR helmet that will blow your brains out when you inevitably lose to some incel who has hacked their copy of the game and has infinite health, lives, armor, and special weapons. It's the only way to live the true death experience! Well, once, anyways.

Tell me you don't know how numbers work without telling me you don't know how numbers work.

(I would complain about how far Slashdot has fallen since back in the day, but even back then the average intelligence wasn't all that high. But at least back then we could take down random websites with our traffic when we all flocked to read TFA.)

Also my Slashdot ID is lower than yours, therefore your post is invalid. :)

Incorrect! There is no false evidence for taking the vaccine. No one says "taking the vaccine will give you toned abs" or "I took the vaccine and now I'm irresistable to the opposite sex". The pro-vaccine information includes valid medical findings and anecdotes like "I took the vaccine and now, as a not-dead person, I can get on with my life and enjoy not being dead from an easily preventable viral disease".

Unless you are one of the few people who have allergic reactions to the vaccine ingredients. Which of course is one of the questions that they ask you before administering the shot. Those numbers are vanishingly small compared to the general population.

Your post is "both sides are bad" when in fact only one side is promulgating ignorance and deadly Internet conspiracy theories.

You can mock whoever you like, but that is a false equivalence. The few vaccinated people who have died from Covid were following science and current medical practices. They did what they were supposed to do and came up on the short end of the percentages. Sadly, no vaccine is 100% effective. However, the people who have refused the vaccine and then died, even though all evidence points to the vaccine's effectiveness in preventing hospitalization and death, are following crack-pot conspiracy theories on the Internet.

Just because the vaccines are not 100% effective is no reason not to take them. Nothing is 100% effective, but two of the three vaccines available in the US are very close. The two mRNA vaccines were over 90% effective in preventing infections pre-Omicron, and they are still very good at preventing Covid infections from becoming serious. If you were going into a gunfight, would you wear a bullet-proof vest that was only 90% effective? Hell yes you would. Maybe even if it was only 50% effective, that's still better odds than no vest at all.

Everyone should know that if they follow crack-pot conspiracy theories on the Internet and die, they will be mocked and held up as examples for everyone else to learn from. Especially if they went out of their way to convince others to follow their deadly fantasies.

I think you meant to say "We [don't] mock people who shoot themselves, fall off of ladders, trip over stuff, etc etc etc".

If so, I completely agree with your post.

yes, how about all these imaginary people? will no one think of these imagined deaths?