It tends to have fewer exploits in the wild because hackers, when given a choice between going after 60% of the desktop market, and going after 5% of the desktop market, will nearly always choose the 60% piece of the pie. It's just not profitable enough to go after a tiny sliver of the market.
Linux underpins the internet. It's the primary server OS on the planet. High-value data is held on Linux systems. The idea that it's not profitable to attack those targets is silly. They're harder to attack. People still do it. That's why there are still ssh port scans for example.
Are we talking about Apple or the USA here?
Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.
It is certainly more like Linux than say, Windows.
It is, but IME a lot of software needs architectural changes to work on it, similar to when you're trying to build software for Windows in cygwin. That's one reason I decided it wasn't worth the hassle back when I was running it.
When it comes to being allowed to do what you want with your computer, it's a lot more like Windows than it is like Linux. And it's been getting worse.
But it is also generally more secure, outside of its obscurity
This is a fantasy not substantiated by evidence. Heartbleed--a Linux vulnerability in an open source library--was lying in plain sight for years before some hacker discovered it, and it was exploited in the wild for years before anybody discovered the attack.
Now tell us how many similar bugs are in Windows, and will be found even without the obscurity of closed source. You don't know, because you depend on Microsoft to tell you when they fuck up, but you're declaring this a victory for Microsoft anyway? Do fucking tell.
Linux desktop with 16 Mb RAM was possible in the 90s
No, 2MB was never enough for a Linux desktop. I had 8MB on my 386 and it was only just sufficient.
So far as fulfillment warehouses go, feasibility is already 100%, that is to say there is no task needed to be performed that can not currently be done by machines.
Again Amazon will replace ALL of their warehouse workers as soon as it is feasible. So far they have only been able to replace some of them.
Was an Intel CPU used to compute this?
The article says this: "Various sources indicate that a single Am9080 processor cost AMD only 50 cents to make (100 per wafer), yet it could sell them to military customers for $700 each." It however does not name "various sources". My best guess is the $0.50 does not include any capital costs and only certain operational costs.
I said the same thing 30 years ago before AI was even in the movies.
30 years ago was 1926?
My solar panels were made in Singapore. Besides China the top producers are Vietnam, Malaysia, and India. They are also made in a host of other countries including Canada. China makes over 80% of the world's supply, though.
Center meeting at 4pm in 2C-543.