initramfs

I use HDMI on my Smart TV and just disabled wifi because I realized it was downloading more than half my bandwidth (a small amount, in fact). It could have been doing an update but I found no reason to leave it on. Occasionally I'll use YT or Prime since it doesn't have to be tethered to a PC, but overall it's nicer as a monitor than a streaming app.

"The car’s unvieling comes as some countries around the world continue to push EV adoption with better and more affordable options. The U.S., however, has taken the opposite track."

Lol, so true. I honestly don't mind waiting for an electric car since I hope to get more mileage out of my current one. If it lasts 10 more years, all the better.

The cars available then should be far better (other than new things I might not want- e.g. more automation).

hi fseifken,

Thanks for the response and I agree there are benefits to newer formats. I actually do prefer newer codecs when I am using a newer system, such as AV1 (I actually wrote a blog post on that yesterday https://inavoyage.blogspot.com/2026/06/720p-on-384kbps-how-h...), and recall avif, but forgot about it.

I think .avif sounds preferrable since it is single frames able to play animations using the same library as av01. I am curious how much CPU usage it needs for a just a few frames. A Pentium 1 might not be able to play it easily, but I imagine a dual core Intel E6400 wouldn't have much of an issue, even if it is 20 years old.

Yeah, basically the only reason I suggested older support was because it was just a couple frames (maybe 5 tops), as opposed to something that uses hundreds or thousands of frames.

for gifs? it seems an image format would be more backward compatible with older devices. Edit: by image format, i meant lightweight animation without a video codec.

I found APNG suffer the same issue, but there may be some workarounds:

https://share.google/aimode/X1Q5rp3z2tEbtDSPf

"Yes, but not natively just by using a standard <img> tag in web browsers. Because native APNGs play continuously like a traditional GIF, you need to use one of the following methods to pause them: [1, 2, 3, 4]

1. The Canvas Method (Best for Web Controls) To add play/pause functionality, you cannot use an <img> tag. Instead, you need to render the APNG onto an HTML <canvas> element and control it using a JavaScript library like apng-js. This provides precise, video-like control over the frames. [1, 2, 3, 4]

2. The Cover Method (Simplest Fallback) If you just want to freeze an APNG on its first frame, you can layer a static .png of the first frame directly over the APNG. When you uncover or hide the static image, the underlying APNG will be revealed and play as normal. [1]

3. Use CSS Animation Alternatives [1] If you are designing the animation yourself, an alternative is to build it as a single static image (a filmstrip of all frames side-by-side) and animate it using CSS background-position. This allows you to pause the image natively using the CSS animation-play-state property. [1, 2, 3]"

I've noticed that GIFS with several frames in them tend to be quite large files. I like that these use dithering, which can reduce the file size. Ideally it would be not larger than 2-3 lightweight photos juxtaposed together, and less than 300KB. I also wish there was a pause button on them because sometimes reading articles on the web with them persistent can get tedious. I suppose disabling images can mediate that, or copying the text to another document.

"In Web Browsers (Chrome, Edge, Firefox): Install browser extensions like GIF Scrubber on Chrome or GIF Blocker on Firefox, which add playback controls to any web page.

On iPhone/iPad: Go to Settings > Accessibility > Motion, and turn off Animated Images to pause all GIFs in Safari.

On Mac: Go to System Settings > Accessibility > Display, and toggle off Animated Images.

In PowerPoint: Press the 1 key on your keyboard during a presentation to pause the GIF."

You are both correct, although I'd like to point out that Linux Foundation draws the line at GPLv2, whereas GNU believes their kernel ought to be GPLv3, and that opens another can of worms. See BSD0: https://spdx.org/licenses/preview/0BSD.html https://landley.net/toybox/license.html

Ah, I see now that journos were referring to the older definition of hacker. I suppose newer interpretations have a ways to go in gaining acceptance, though I am not sure why the phrase hacker/cracker is even used, when other words could be used too, like tamperer (for intrusion) and tinkerer (for non-builder/non-intruder (i.e. on their own equipment, or a lab's equipment, and learner). Kind of like the phrase "me and the gang," although that word might never gain a total conversion, nor should.

I think the usage of the word in the CNN article is more like a news report saying there was a bear attack. Bears hunt salmon, eat berries and veggies, since they're omnivores. A report is only going to be typically referring to bears in reference to an attack on humans, but bears have other normal activities, like communing with other bears, taking a nap, raising cubs and going on walks. In that sense, hackers do partake in multiple, non attack activities.

It would be just as unusual to have a story about hackers doing acts of good will, like helping old ladies cross the street. But a news report isn't going to cover that. "Hacker altruist volunteers at soup kitchen" might make a headline, I suppose.

Thanks for highlighting the even earlier term from 1963. If that is the case, then why don't journalists use the word "computer intruder" instead of hacker, when it's less a catchall?

The funny thing about these comments is that most of the replies to my comment have been more defensive than my own. I wasn't suggesting a monopoly on the term, and I wasn't suggesting "hacker" shouldn't be ever be used. I just said it's not very accurate, and the average non-technical reader may not know the difference.

It's not so much a fight as a reminder of the technical words that actually distinguish one type from another. Are hackers considered ethical in the press today? 40 years of movies and press articles hasn't exactly made the idea of "white hat" a known term. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hat_(computer_security)

It's kind of like Australia or the UK saying kids are "hacking" their PCs to use VPNS. There can be a very legitimate use of tools, but the portrayal of users bypassing blocks could just as easily be painted in a negative light.

One time someone made a joke or observation, 20 years or so ago, that their Myspace page was "hacked" because someone "posted on their wall". It's obviously not that misused, but just labeled that way when misinformed.

"The message sent was of the ‘Extreme Alert’ type and contained the word ‘misanthropy’ – which means hatred towards humanity. It is probably a hacker attack,” the agency’s statement said."

As this happens whenever there is an intrusion reported in the press, the word "hacker" is often misused:

"There is another group of people who loudly call themselves hackers, but aren't. These are people (mainly adolescent males) who get a kick out of breaking into computers and phreaking the phone system. Real hackers call these people ‘crackers’ and want nothing to do with them. Real hackers mostly think crackers are lazy, irresponsible, and not very bright, and object that being able to break security doesn't make you a hacker any more than being able to hotwire cars makes you an automotive engineer. Unfortunately, many journalists and writers have been fooled into using the word ‘hacker’ to describe crackers; this irritates real hackers no end.

The basic difference is this: hackers build things, crackers break them."

http://catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html

Thanks!

I have published all my papers since 2023 on the web. None were peer reviewed, but on pre-print servers.

Einstein's 1905 papers were published without peer review.

I still get spam emails asking me to pay for papers I've already uploaded to public servers years ago.

Here's one from this morning- already deleted by Google's spam filter: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1h8YVu5-DEx-1mOibiLpfJHrErvX...

The actual article was intended as a joke: https://vixra.org/abs/2405.0051 yet fraudulent publishers continue to treat it as a serious article.

It would be nice if publishing a fake paper every now and then could serve like a sinkhole for scammers, but I would be too optimistic or naive. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_sinkhole

And the Xerox Alto had a budget for 10 years. Unthinkable in today's "What did you publish?? Publish or it didn't happen. No R01 for you! (2 year funding)" culture.

I've seen the option in IE- .mhtml.

For some reason it displays in IE better but I don't recall seeing this option in chrome of Firefox recently..

And unsurprisingly, the S23 camera is probably still better than most entry level phones being released today.

https://marcusb.org/hacks/quixotic.html more lightweight than this anvil

Chrome too

Phones don't get "slow" on their own. It's usually due to bloatware from upgrades. Many phone cameras are already quite good. The only remaining reason to upgrade is possible security vulnerabilities, but even that doesn't require heavy software. Supporting larger apps is the main reason the system requirements continue to increase, since Niklaus Wirth wrote, "A Plea For Lean Software" in 1995.

But even if people could trade in their phones for a small deposit, how many actually do (and not because they would use it- typically storing it in their drawer is safer than and less time consuming than figuring out how to run a factory reset before giving it to a datacenter.

I've thought about a program where people could drop it off in their mailbox and have a delivery service pick it up (possibly the USPS, but I think they wouldn't want to be burdened with handling lots of lithium batteries).

20 years from now phones will be powerful enough that they can run on capacitors, thinner than a credit card, and deconverged from the multimedia omnibus systems that they are today. Sure it is convenient, but I think the feature adds will plateau.

agreed, there is a memory aspect to it too. That said, there is something about this video that looks funny: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M3-15YADeyg (I made this last year)

note to self: run Wayland without systemd: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34977129

agree.

I hacked a Panasonic GH1 to use 24fps in 2014. My newer camera, the GX85 includes this frame rate by default. Movies look more dreamlike in 24fps, due to the magic number of resetting some cycle every 5 seconds (24 frames in 5 seconds is 120 frames). Seinfeld was also filmed in 24fps. Maybe the jokes sounded funnier becaue of that? I don't know, but I enjoy playing games at 20- 30fps more than 60fps for the cinematic effect.

Wafer.space slots can support around 4-500,000 transistors in 1x1 titles, usually reserved for 1000 dies. The 386 (non SLC version) had 275,000. In theory this could be manufactured at 180nm/130nm https://wafer.space/

yes, amazing complement to a super rare non-release (but protoype) exists.

Since they are out of patent, curious if anyone would be willing to manufacture it again.

I found a 386 compatible linux image: https://github.com/hatonthecat/linux_distro_tests/commit/816... It's a floppy image, although there are other bootable isos in on of the other folders.

The Github page that the article links to at the bottom is Chris Noeding. Thus they are the same.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Kingdom first biography of Apple

It's from the 1KB Club: https://1kb.club/

This one also has 3D animations, around 2KB:

https://intercity-vpn.de/