No. As enshittification encroaches onto Linux the user base is moving the other way. To their benefit, I might add. With ZFS on root in FreeBSD it's a no-brainer.
Linux is feeling more and more like a bunch of random tools thrown together as opposed to a complete OS designed to work as a whole.
ZFS works fine on root on Linux. I use it on multiple machines.
> Linux is feeling more and more like a bunch of random tools thrown together as opposed to a complete OS designed to work as a whole.
This has quite literally always been the case and seems intentional. Linux is the kernel only, others supply the userland of their choice (aka a Linux distribution).
If you're privileged enough to work a six-figure tech job while engaging in a homesteader larp in a "cabin in the woods", you can probably afford the fee. So can "off-grid" YouTuber grifters.
It's like everyone feels entitled to something they didn't know existed a few years ago.
People feel entitled to the advertised rate structure. Was there anywhere in the promo material that you might get slapped with $1500 connection fees?
If you are not big tech, that’s a lot of money. For the home in the middle of nowhere, $1500 could be more than you would pay in monthly rent. Plenty of rural people without access to good internet were hoping for Starlink to save them from garbage DSL connection options.
I go to their home page, click "get started," and it asks me where I want service. If I put in a place with a congestion surcharge, then it shows me on the next page. In fact, you have to pay it up front to order service. Seems advertised to me. If you don't want to pay it, then you don't have to use their service.
They've generally chosen to go with bandwidth caps and throttling instead. Different ways of managing the shared resource.
I'm not really sure what people want here. Capacity is limited. They're adding more as fast as they can, to the point that they've launched more satellites than everyone else has combined in history. But it takes time. Until capacity meets demand, there are going to be limitations, one way or another. At least they are actively adding capacity, unlike some ISPs I've had with old infrastructure that couldn't handle modern demands and just left it that way.
I'm sure people would be complaining just the same if they had no surcharge but throttled everybody, or imposed strict data limits, or stopped accepting new customers entirely in congested areas.
Back in the day when analog modems were becoming obsolete, there was a hue and cry from broadband enthusiasts that cable modem technology was inferior infrastructure. These folks all agreed that DOCSIS and cable modems would suffer crippling congestion in neighborhoods. That your cable modem's bandwidth would be shared bandwidth, shared on a medium with all your neighbors up to that head-end, and that this shared medium would inevitably be oversold many times over, and that cable-modem ISPs could never possibly meet bandwidth demands on these local networks.
In contrast, DSL technology was sold as "never congested, never shared": that is, your copper pairs would wire up directly to the wire center, and have a dedicated connection into the ISP's backbone (and that ISP was experienced in telecommunications, rather than the entertainment industry) and therefore, DSL was always superior due to its lack of shared mediums.
It was a weird argument, because inevitably, every provider's core network is shared to some degree, and cable modems really have not suffered congestion beyond the ordinary. Conversely, DSL also had its strategies for aggregation, overselling, and shared media. But a lot of people believed those stories about topology myths.
Personally, I switched from ADSL to cable modem over 18 years ago, and I haven't regretted it. Very stable, always available and reliable, and plenty of bandwidth to spare, for my applications.
> cable modems really have not suffered congestion beyond the ordinary
I've lived in and had friends live in apartments with absolutely terrible noisy neighbor problems on coax networks. Too much junk plugged in making all kinds of noise on the same run making internet services close to useless. DSL infrastructure lost out to cable at the start in that area so it got practically no upgrades since it was first implemented. While far more reliable it was ancient speeds at even higher prices.
It seems like it largely took 5G home internet actually being a thing in those areas for the cable companies to start fixing those buildings and rooting out the problems.
Cable modem congestion and line quality issues definitely vary greatly on the operator and the actual location installed at. A cheap old apartment building filled with poor residents is likely to have abysmal line quality. A well-off neighborhood of single family homes probably has no problems with line quality at all.
It's a lot easier to upgrade the capacity at a central office than it is to upgrade an entire neighborhood. Plenty of cable infrastructure was built out when it was just a broadcast (multicast?) medium and the only concern was making sure signal strength was adequate at all receivers. If you repurpose that wiring for emulated point-to-point transmission, there may not be a whole lot for each individual.
Random example, my house has fiber and cable available. The internet plans are similar, except fiber offers 30x higher upload speeds, which is a direct consequence of better topology.
Boo hoo.... these same people were previously faced with $40,000 connection fees for Comcast and Verizon to trench a cable 1/2 mile to their property so $1500 seems like a pittance.
Look, friends of mine did this, they bought a country place so they can live the dream and write software in the sticks.
Next thing you know they're drilling new wells and installing a generator to support the fantasy while the bills pile up. When you bring modern conveniences to rural life it costs money.
A few days ago people were
telling me the Starlink was brilliant because it gave small African villages with no mains electricity an internet connection to share.
This kind of behaviour does rather dampen the value proposition for such people.
Do you think tech bros who voluntarily choose to live in the woods should pay the same subsidized price as a rural African schoolhouse? Equity and all that.
It doesn't matter what I think in this case (I have already decided to not give Musk any money), what matters here is what Musk thinks and does, and how the actual real market reacts to that.
Sounds like a lot but compare it to Edge also being patched for 428 Chromium CVEs this month.
If 20 years ago you told me a single piece of software had 428 vulnerabilities I wouldn't have believed it.
If Chromium has that many security bugs, perhaps the move fast and break things approach of spraying diarrhea masquerading as code into a keyboard — in a rush to add new features no one asked for — needs to be reexamined.
20 years ago a malformed packet to winsock would crash the computer, 5 years later installing win2k on my buddies computer (no router/firewall) a few minutes after we finished the install "windows will reboot in nn seconds" whelp time to re-install without a network connection... we've added a lot of layers since win2k, mostly in the name of ease of development, and I don't feel like we've met that goal but we sure found a way to get a million monkies behind a million typwriters, and now we're aiming to replace the monkies with simulated monkies. Time to smell my fingers and fall out of the tree ;-D
> If 20 years ago you told me a single piece of software had 428 vulnerabilities I wouldn't have believed it.
For something as complex as an operating system or a web browser, even one from 20 years ago (say, Windows XP or IE/Firefox) I wouldn't have believed there were 428 vulnerabilities either, I would have assumed there were much more than that.
Chromium is a three-decades-long project (origins coming from Webkit, which comes from KHTML, which was 1998) - I can assure you that does not meet the "move fast and break things" phrase you're trying to smear it with.
20 years ago software wasn't as much battle tested as today, had way less feature set, was less connected to the internet, and etc. 428 CVEs looks small, assuming not all have CVSS 9.8 or something.
>That said, sure, it had a fraction of the features back then, and only a fraction of the world population was connected to the internet.
And the world was better for it. Connectivity and internet are not inherent goods. They can be used for good purposes but it is hard to argue that has been the mean.
Chromium is probably 30 million+ lines of code, and we generally see that as things get more complex its even easier to accidentally write code which can be exploited.
If it has 1 vulnerability in every 10k loc of code we'd be talking about 3,000 vulns (with no churn) - we used to care about defect density, and most software wouldn't go more than a few hundred lines without SOME bug, whether that's a "vulnerability" is often a layered question.
Even if it had the Microsoft logo attached? Windows was always known to not be the most secure of products. I can't imagine anything else from the same company would be any better
Didn't the crustacean site temporarily lose its domain a minute ago because someone had to make an in-person payment to whatever Serbian mafia controls .rs?
Vanity domains are beyond stupid and not worth the trouble.
What exactly was hubristic about the comment? A young account with "See you at the bottom of the thread where the cool people hang out." and "down weighted" as it's descriptor?
I could go with ad hom. I accept rude. It was rude.
This is open-source hardware, caveat emptor is implied.
At this stage in a project like this, I’d expect the people who were getting boards fabbed to also have the skills to sanity check the schematics and layout before they sent the gerbers off to China.
That’s a fairly unreasonable take. We are talking about a hobbyist Github account reverse engineering decades old hardware. The warning is in italics clearly after the introduction. This is stuff for the experts. What more do you want?
> If you want to build this board, first make sure you have an AMD InterWave chip, the AM78C201. The design of the card is quite simple since essentially all sound card functionality is built into the AMD chip.
...it's a breakout board for an OOP chip that's impossible to find?
Maybe we ought to take away society's Spotify etc. and go back to trading cassettes.
I predict it will last all of two days.
You see the mentally ill chaos unfold within hours when DNS or a CDN goes down. Imagine taking their datacenter-dependent toys away for more than a day.
How will they navigate job interviews (in between datacenter protests) without relying on ChatGPT to feed them answers?
Which is never, unless something is broken.
Having rolling releases for a CAR is absolutely stupid.