Extremely unsafe reputationally, and extremely dubious in terms of profits.

Especially for an administration who's priority is to eliminate pornography as an evil to society and why the US isn't having more babies and getting divorced way too often.

It's in the book. Everything Trump has done has followed Project 2025 (and now Project 2026) book. Getting rid of pornographic materials is pretty much the first chapter.

Four of the top five and five of the top ten games on Are We Anti-Cheat Yet's list are marked "Denied", which it defines as "Games where the developers have explicitly stated that they will not enable the anti-cheat solution to work on Linux or have denied the possibility of Linux support".

Well at least someone can get their 11th version of something running correctly.

Well, we technically skilled Windows 9 (the version after Windows 8 was Windows 10), so...

Then again, if you want to toss in the fact that the Windows NT line started at 3.5, or add in the various versions of Windows from MS-DOS and NT....

Republicans Before MAGA: Tyranny and government overreach are bad! Now hand me my guns
MAGA Republicans Now: If it's alright for China, it's alright for us - as long as our cult leader is the one in power. And no one needs guns, you shouldn't be carrying them

FTFY.

MacOS was insanely brittle to write software for too, even by MS-DOS standards. The popular MS-DOS compilers had enough checks built-in to debug builds that if you had a pointer problem your program would just crash into the debugger, it was remarkable. 16-bit windows was pretty resilient too - if you had an out of bounds error and you had used GlobalAlloc your program would again just crash (allocations were rounded up to the next 16 bytes, so you might have a silent bug ... but the OS would not crash). On MacOS before Yellow Box your whole-ass computer would crash when you had a pointer problem.

Now, 16-bit Windows was nowhere near as bulletproof as 32-bit Windows, that is for sure. Resource leaks were not cleaned up for you and there wasn't a whole lot of sanity checking on structures passed to the OS. But it was far more bulletproof than MacOS that is for sure.

Win16 was resilient only because of the 386 which had a built in MMU. Classic MacOS ran without an MMU and didn't assume you had one. There were some features that required an MMU but the OS was written to not expect one. Heck, MacOS didn't really have the usermode-kernel mode functinality because that was broken in the 68000 (fixed in the 68010 - several instructions were not marked privileged when they should be)

Win16 in 386 enhanced mode had a whole pile of protections inherent in the 386 CPU which meant you could get some protections out there, though the dreaded "General Protection Fault" wasn't that far away.

Classic MacOS had none of that - no MMU, no userspace-kernel space separation (it ran in supervisor mode only). So a wild pointer can easily corrupt things.

It's why Apple had so many "next OS" projects from MkLinux (Mach kernel core with Linux around it - because at the time Linux didn't have a PowerPC port), Copland and others. It took them inheriting NextStep for them to actually move to something more robust, which was a Mach kernel with BSD.

The only reason MS-DOS was reliable was the damned segmentation of the 8086 meant your segment pointers had to be good and MS-DOS could be somewhat protected because of it. Anyone dealing with the memory map had a lot of fun with that. But it also meant a wild ass DS pointer would be more likely to corrupt your data segment than it would something MS-DOS needed. 68000 was a flat address space so a wild pointer could easily access anything. (Even worse were bad programming habits - the index registers were 32 bit, but only the lower 24 bits made it onto the address bus as the 68000 only had 24 address lines. Thus, people would use the upper 8 bits to store data with, including the Mac ROMs. That's what the "32-bit clean" meant in the MacOS days - none of the code you used would actually use the upper 8 bits of the index registers to store data so they could refer to a proper 32 bit address).

The amazing thing would be that Classic MacOS actually managed to run like that in 1999 and beyond (it took until OS X 10.2 or 10.3 when Apple stopped supporting dual booting back into Classic)

In other words, it's just another fancy ARM SoC with a silly name. Like the trillions of other ARM SoCs out there.

The big question I suppose is why they went with ARM and not say, RISC-V to make their SoC.

Kubermetes is like Docker. They're container systems. Basically they use Linux namespaces to let you run an independent userspace to your current userspace. This can have valuable benefits - like needing to run an ancient userspace for some tool on modern hardware (e.g., if you need an Ubuntu 14.04 LTS environment for some reason, it's basically impossible to run it on modern hardware without building your own kernel and stuff).

All Linux is doing is standard app level virtualization - you know the same protections that keep your web browser from interfering with your word processor.

Containers have their uses, and are far more lightweight than VMs since it's just a few additional Linux processes in the end (they all run on the host kernel natively). They are still vulnerable to the same inter-process attacks because to Linux, they're just another process running on the same machine. Kubernetes and Docker just are applications that help manage the Linux namespaces and virtual file systems

Yeah but still fuck all the companies that make these things.
I've never had one and don't drink and drive but they're the same as the scammy prison phone companies and stuff.
"You deserve it" isn't some excuse to enrich a "private public partnership"

Well, you don't HAVE to get an interlock installed. The judge can easily just say you're not allowed to drive at all as the alternative.

It's an option to being forced to use Uber/Lyft or public transit.

I mean, sometimes the alternative is preferable - maybe you own a rare car and don't want some mechanic shove an interlock into it in the crudest way possible.

Judge has a lot of discretion. They could toss you in jail. They could revoke your driving privileges. They could let you drive but with an interlock. You often get to choose. They can't force an interlock on you (e.g., you don't want someone to modify your pride and joy), but you'll be stuck with the other options.

Quite a bit different from prison phones - you have no choice when using a prison phone. But you do have a choice if you want an interlock installed or to choose other options.

From what I see, Iran is completely offline at this point, right?

And maybe that's exactly what the creators of that malware want you to think.

Iâ(TM)m going to assume you have zero personal faults and do not require any form of medication strictly because of shitty life choices to be able to stand on such a pedestal. Otherwise, remind me why I should have sympathy for sugar junkies suffering from preventable diabetes when the insulin factory gets hacked. Call a fucking nutritionist.

Except in general, you don't get interlock systems forced on you for your first mistake. Interlocks are generally the last resort.

The first DUI is usually a fine, maybe some light jail time (a couple of weeks) if it's bad. The second time is a much larger fine and more jail time

The third time is usually when you either get your driving privileges taken away or you get required to install an interlock (at your expense - it's not cheap to install, and the monthly fees and activities you have to do to maintain it certainly aren't easy).

Most drivers stop at 1. Which can be a simple mistake and most people learn from it and never do it again. Get caught a second time and it's usually a wake up call to start cleaning up your life. The third time generally means it's time for forceful intervention.

So if you're forced to get an interlock on your car, basically you've failed multiple times at trying to fix your life and you got lucky the judge has sympathy for you. For they could easily just toss you in jail for a good long while as well.

You don't get the interlock for a mistake. Some jurisdictions require a pattern of DUIs before they'd force it on you so it's not even your 3rd time, it's far more times. It also means you are also giving permission to be pulled over randomly for a sobriety check - a cop passing has the right to purposefully stop you to do this.

If you have an interlock, it means you've failed to try to fix your alcoholism yourself and if the interlock makes your life difficult or inconvenient, well, you could be forced to catch the bus everywhere instead.

A proof-of-work puzzle would disadvantage phone and tablet users. One targeted specifically toward GPUs would disadvantage users of older off-lease ThinkPad laptops with an Intel IGP.

I can think of a few things leading to Voight-Kampff-style polygraph tests being phased out in this timeline

1. Several U.S. states have banned reliance on polygraph test results by employers. "Polygraph" on Wikipedia lists Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Jersey, Oregon, Delaware and Iowa. In addition, the federal Employee Polygraph Protection Act 1998 generally bans polygraphing by employers outside the rent-a-cop industry.
2. Autism advocacy organizations raised a stink about false positive results on autistic or otherwise neurodivergent human beings.
3. The LLM training set probably picked up answers from someone's cheat sheet, such as "The turtle was dragging its hind leg, and I was waiting for it to stop squirming so I could see if it needed to go to the vet."

You think the cheap Chinese vehicles are doing excess amounts of stuff? They are cheap - the low cost BYD Seal can't even do any connected car stuff because it's so cheap, BYD didn't include a cellular modem or service with it. Instead the infotainment will do Android Auto or Apple CarPlay.

That's why US automakers are scared - they've been chasing profits by getting people to buy bigger and bigger SUVs for 30 years (that cost more money), while the Chinese have been refining their vehicles.

The early Chinese vehicles were a lot like the early Korean vehicles of the 80s (Hyundai Pony, anyone?). But just like how the Koreans have managed go from ultra cheap cars that barely work to decent cars, so have the Chinese. It's why BYD is one of the leading automakers of China - able to build all sorts of vehicles from cars to trucks and buses. (Electric buses are nifty, and in places like Australia, it's the HVAC that consumes most of the battery power, not driving around for 18 hours per day).

Also, avoid luxury brands. BMW and Mercedes have hundreds of computers and they're constantly throwing codes. The more practical ones have far fewer computers.

All I know is I can't wait until BYD comes to Canada. (Thanks Trump!)