Sure, and the VR market hasn't ossified and settled yet so it's still anyone's game.
285 karma · joined August 17, 2012
A lot of people are missing the fact that the Steam Frame is Valve's attempt at staking a position in the wide-open and malleable VR space.
With Google, they identified that Microsoft developing their own search engine as an existential threat. Additionally, Internet Explorer being the only bottleneck for the web as a platform was a problem. And thus they broke it wide open, developing web technologies, investing in Firefox initially, releasing Chrome, and ultimately delivering Android.
In mobile, Microsoft came too late to respond to Apple and Google.
Meta and Apple have identified that VR is one of the next gold-mines in terms of a similar app-store and experience rich ecosystem potential comparable to PCs, web, and mobile, and have poured billions into development of hardware and software. It's documented that Meta attempted to create a proprietary OS for their VR headsets (and has debatable success).
Valve, while having fewer resources than any of the behemoths above, decided to hedge their bets with Linux and entering the market first through their well established brand built with video games. It would not surprise me if the Steam Frame begins their entry into other entertainment experiences and app opportunities. Microsoft has reasonable success weaving their ecosystem together (PC + Xbox), but they're foolish to think that their dominance would continue into VR because they have the PC space... They made that mistake with Windows Phone.
> New views: While we support all the fundamental views, we're planning on adding more advanced views such as a watch list, memory view, disassembly view, and a stack trace view
Here is ublock origin's experimental mv3 version with detailed notes on limitations: [2] [3]
[3] https://github.com/gorhill/uBlock/commit/a559f5f2715c58fea4d...
Does this imply that eBPF is a bad foundation for security-focused tooling? Brendan states the following at the close of this blog post:
> There is potential for an awesome eBPF security product, and it's not just the visibility that's valuable (all those arrows) it's also the low overhead. These slides included our overhead evaluation showing bcc/eBPF was far more efficient than auditd or go-audit. (It was pioneering work, but unfortunately the slides are all we have: Alex, I, and others left Netflix before open sourcing it.) There are now other eBPF security products, including open source projects (e.g., tetragon), but I don't know enough about them all to have a recommendation.
> Note that I'm talking about the observability tools here and not the eBPF kernel runtime itself, which has been designed as a secure sandbox. Nor am I talking about privilege escalation, since to run the tools you already need root access (that car has sailed!).
This reads to me that security tooling built on top of eBPF is possible and various organizations are in-flight making it happen (such as Falco[2], Tetragon[3], and Tracee[4]). These teams have recognized the shortcomings of eBPF and are layering other kernel-instrumentation capabilities such as kprobes and LSM hooks into their solutions.
Additionally, the TrailOfBits blog post states:
> Developers need to be aware of pitfalls like probe unreliability, data truncation, instruction limits, concurrency issues, event overload, and page faults. Workarounds exist, but they are imperfect and often add complexity.
These inherent limitations exist primarily because eBPF is a virtual machine within kernel space. Many of these constraints exist because eBPF programs should _never_ lock up the kernel. The eBPF verifier[5] does some checks on the possible code paths the program can take, such as finite bounded loops, null checks on variables, etc. The foundational aspect here is that the eBPF virtual machine is designed to protect the kernel while running programs in kernel space, and that imperfect/complex workarounds may be needed by security-focused projects to respect that foundation.
[1] https://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2023-04-28/ebpf-security-i... [2] https://github.com/falcosecurity/falco/ [3] https:/github.com/cilium/tetragon [4] https://github.com/aquasecurity/tracee [5] https://docs.kernel.org/bpf/verifier.html
They've been teasing their Virgo prototype [2] [3] [4] on their social media feeds.
[1] https://system76.com/accessories/launch
[2] https://fosstodon.org/@carlrichell/110571781656976874
In the time before Chrome, Firefox market share grew in part because of how aggressively Google and the rest of the web advertised for them. However, that market share peaked and shrunk after Chrome was released; Google shifted _all_ of their advertising from Firefox for Chrome.
As someone who enjoyed smaller screens, the app started getting cluttered with attractions, reviews, and various icons in way of UI and map elements.
Basically, Pokemon Snap but for history.
> Org grammar for tree-sitter. It is not meant to implement emacs' orgmode parser, but to implement a grammar that can usefully parse org files to be used in neovim and any library that uses tree-sitter parsers.
This grammar is in active development and is being used by nvim-orgmode/orgmode [1], a org-mode neovim plugin.
Some additional resources some might find useful:
* Org Syntax - https://orgmode.org/worg/dev/org-syntax.html
* EBNF grammar - https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...
* Tree-sitter - https://tree-sitter.github.io/tree-sitter/
Apologies, missed that for sure. There could still be a multitude of other factors at play (backlight brightness, saturation setting, sharpness setting, etc.)
> But the broader point that the channel is specifically unboxing/first-impressions and not a review is definitely accurate.
Agreed!
I personally watched the 54 minute in-depth overview from My Life in Gaming[2], and it was clear that LTT/ShortCircuit overlooked or were incorrect in some parts of their initial impressions.
EDIT: Specially in regards to the display, they spent no time at all to experiment with the 3 built-in GBA display modes; if they used the modes that replicated the original GBA or GBA SP (AGS-101) screens, they would've had a more color-equivalent appearance. MLiG in their video spent 10+ minutes on display modes alone.
The 2012 original, remastered in 2015: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nJPERZDfyWc
Many users report Wi-Fi connectivity issues[0]. When I did an upgrade, I was unable to connect my laptop and Roomba to wifi, and had to rollback to 19.07.8.
[0] https://github.com/200ok-ch/organice
[1] https://github.com/200ok-ch/org-parser/blob/master/resources...
[2] https://github.com/kristijanhusak/orgmode.nvim/issues/31#iss...
However, regarding Servo specifically, there are contributions on their GitHub[1] and the stewardship of the project is now under the Linux Foundation[2].
[1] https://github.com/servo/servo/commits/master [2] https://blog.servo.org/2020/11/17/servo-home/
It should come to no surprise that notable torrenting sites have many low-effort imitators. If anyone could copy stuff already out there, why spend the extra effort to innovate?
I'm all for open-source, but I recognize the value of copyright (and how it protects FOSS-licensed material) and healthy competition and innovation.
From what I understand, Bram's vim development workflow is very similar to other emac's dev: submitting and discussing patches via the mailing list. There was something (a bot?) setup such that PRs are forwarded to the mailing list: https://github.com/vim/vim/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
This was discussed pretty extensively when vim moved from Google Code to GitHub: https://groups.google.com/g/vim_dev/c/Io5A_Zir--k/m/faPCHWYf...
In general, PR/patches-friction should not be an obstacle for contributions because it can be alleviated in part by tooling that glues the workflows more-or-less seamlessly.
EDIT: It might be worth asking how the neovim community in general may have been helped by the decision to make github their home, or maybe even ask the emacs-lsp devs on their gitter: https://gitter.im/emacs-lsp/lsp-mode ?
EDIT 2: In the vim-dev mailing list, there are threads started from GitHub pull requests that include .patch and .diff files: https://groups.google.com/g/vim_dev/c/7VpUqzoQycY/m/W_7zhTGf...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RmNCVHcZp5s episode w/ Jaron Lanier (re: data unions, brokers, etc.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-WuwG_fYJ4 pre-launch episode
Make sure to check out the FAQ and Privacy Policy of the project to get a better grasp of what legal framework and actions they are taking.
Have you ever checked out OSTEP: Three Easy Pieces? (http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/OSTEP/) I am finding that a much more accessible, organized, and easy-to-ready resource than Tanenbaum's Modern Operating Systems. What do you think of it?
Also, I've recently got my hands on "Practical Filesystem Design," written by the developer of the BeOS filesystem. A PDF is available here: http://www.nobius.org/dbg/practical-file-system-design.pdf
First off, congrats, this is amazing and beautiful. I've been a long time Firefox poweruser, and here are some of the things I noticed myself:
- Lack of differentiation between bookmarks, history, open pages, tags, etc. in URL bar. - Inability to reorder tabs
- No context of tabs opened/ to switch to
- Unable to specify sync categories
- Unable to disable password saving asks
For those who don't know, Joyent's SmartOS is a fork of OpenSolaris and arguably the canonical implementation of the kernel today. They've made a ton of improvements the past few years.
Bryan Cantrill is one of the guys who helped make this happen, and while it is a 2 hour video, it is definitely worth the time to watch it. At the bare minimum, check out the slides!
This matters to me because I was recently checking out an interesting installation method that allowed me to do away with Linux partitions by solely using BTRFS subvolumes. (If you look at the IRC chat logs of #btrfs, #archlinux-newbie, and #elementary, I was btrfs-newbie trying it a few days back.)
As of now, I am nearly done with my laptop set up, and I am happily running Arch Linux and elementaryOS with a shared /home subvolume all under the same BTRFS partition. This is a really neat feature that I could take advantage of in the Ubuntu installer (Ubiquity, was it?). I did not have this issue on Arch because Arch's installation method was practically a chroot and create the filesystem and package structure in the proper places.
Please keep this in mind when moving forward. It would be interesting if you can maintain that aspect in your next release, Isis. Thanks so much for your time, and keep up the amazing work!