karteum

By the way, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Denver : "Project Denver was originally intended to support both ARM and x86 code using code morphing technology from Transmeta, but was changed to the ARMv8-A 64-bit instruction set because Nvidia could not obtain a license to Intel's patents"

Does it also work with browsers on Android ? (I always experience difficulties to backup my tabs...)

> Hardware companies just can't figure out a way to give us free OS upgrades and make money

The biggest question is : why does it take so much efforts to design an upgrade ? Unfortunately Google never made it mandatory for chipset/hardware designers to have an abstraction layer (similar to BIOS/UEFI/ACPI/system tables) that would make a single Android kernel and OS install and work on every devices... (And I have criticized Microsoft a lot for many things, but I have to acknoledge that they have an amazing backward-compatibility track record, even for device drivers, while Linux has its stable_api_nonsense policy...)

You might be interested in this (in French, but you may try with google translate or other alternatives :) https://www.bortzmeyer.org/8240.html

It is a very interesting explanation of debates around https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8240.txt

As far as I know, Jitsi uses SFU (i.e. not P2P, not MCU), so every device sends their stream once (to the server), which doesn't do any transcoding but only forwards the streams to each client.

Therefore (just like multicast) you only send your stream once, and every client receives n streams.

Looks very interesting ! The authors talk about Numba, but does anyone know how it would compare to Codon ? (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33908576)

edit: after trying quickly, it seems that lpython really requires type annotations everywhere, while codon is more permissive (or does type inference)

I found this a few years ago (uses only a simple low-tech design, simple materials, and heat from the sun. I don't know how efficient it really is)

http://www.gabrielediamanti.com/projects/eliodomestico/

> "The implementation should be simple too at less than 10K C lines, because I want wider adoption of this tool. Simple code is easier to learn and maintain. I'd like also to avoid any external dependencies for this project. At the end of the article, you can see the actual results I have now. (...) As for the generated code performance, I decided that it should be at least 70% of GCC -O2 performance. The implementation should be simple too at less than 10K C lines, because I want wider adoption of this tool. Simple code is easier to learn and maintain. (...) The biggest cons of the existing projects were their size, the fact that it would be hard for me to achieve my goals using them, and that I can not control the projects. Also, the smaller source size of the MIR project makes studying the code easier for other people and reduces the effort required to maintain it."

I can understand the point for LLVM, but I don't fully understand why QBE (https://c9x.me/compile/doc/llvm.html, which is part of his assessment) didn't fit in what he is looking for.

Just to mention: there was this article (in French but you may use google translate) about fire hazards in disposals related to used lithium batteries...

https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/energie-environne...

The word "stable" can have different meanings, e.g. stable behavior/stable interfaces. I am using arch/manjaro on my personal machine, but I installed Debian for some of my remote family members (who mostly just need firefox+libreoffice+vlc+cups) since this makes me confident that they can get periodic security updates and bugfixes all by themselves without needing my intervention (while rolling releases sometimes require some adjustments or troubleshooting e.g. on the config files, etc).

Maybe that's a stupid question, but : why can't its lifetime be extended again ?

The article says "much of its hardware is decades old, which could eventually see the station become dangerous or even uncontrollable in orbit" but it's not very explicit about why we couldn't change some internal hardware / repair what needs to be repaired and keep the main overall structure for a longer lifetime ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Denver : "Project Denver was originally intended to support both ARM and x86 code using code morphing technology from Transmeta, but was changed to the ARMv8-A 64-bit instruction set because Nvidia could not obtain a license to Intel's patents"

> Others have mentioned Fabrice Bellard's LTE code, but (AFIAK) it's not freely available. Don't take this as a criticism. Bellard has done some great Free software and it shouldn't be expected that he will release everything as Free software.

Also, I think that if Fabrice would release it as open-source, the pros/cons balance would be different compared to other projects (ffmpeg, qemu...) because

* very few people would be able to use and benefit this, considering that 1°/ you need proper (expensive) hardware, 2°/ anyway you cannot use licensed bands, 3°/ actually you can (mostly) also not use unlicensed bands without proper support from phones and without implementing the required band-sharing mechanisms from the regulation (e.g. listen-before-talk), and anyway LAA requires to use a licensed band as an anchor for signaling...

* it would have cancelled a source of revenue (today through Amarisoft)

Notice that it's not the only C++ web framework (which means there are some use cases) : see for example https://www.webtoolkit.eu/wt

> But replacing a Macbook M1 with a Thinkpad only makes sense if the Thinkpad is better in some aspects, not if it's just good enough. Otherwise you would just keep your somewhat better laptop and replace it later if you ever have to, right?

Being able to remove the SSD (to recover data), to easily replace parts and repair the computer (especially when travelling a lot), to keep control and ensure a long-tife to your machine (rather than being stuck with no software upgrade when Apple decides the machine is too old), having better connectivity (hdmi, ethernet, sd...), etc. All of those are aspects where the Thinkpad is better than the M1 and can effectively be considered as upgrades ! Raw CPU horsepower and battery life are not the only criteria that matters. (and maybe once the author realized that, he also considered it was worthwhile to sell his M1 while it still had some value on the 2nd hand market rather than keep it and lose all the value if anything happens to the machine that is not easily fixable)

> It offers tangible benefits

Yes, you listed them and they are valid, except

> including long-term environmental sustainability

Err... no not really ! The environmental impact of pretty much all consumer electronics is by (very) far dominated by the impact of its manufacturing (mining, water for manufacturing the chips, oil for transport, robots for assembly in countries where electricity is made with coal, etc), therefore anyone trying to be serious about "environmental sustainability" understands that it mostly implies to extend as much as possible existing equipment and avoid buying new ones (even if the old ones are bulky, noisy and consume a lot of electricity compared to the new)

> I'm paying $5/mo. for that to not be that screwed (I have family who got locked out. It does happen.)

But the article precisely addresses that:

For example, in HN discussions people will often recommend Fastmail or Protonmail, but they've had their problems too (FM: 2017, 2020, 2022, PM: 2018, 2019, 2021). Especially given that these are much smaller services I'm not convinced that the risk is lower there. Any system is going to have to handle this sort of problem, and you're not going to find one that never has false positives.

What I'd like to know is : do FM/PM more easily enable to talk to a human ?

I also agree that we desperately need more attention on climate change. In addition to that, to my knowledge no art was actually damaged by climate change protestors (who mostly projected soup on a glass, not directly on paintings...)

This comment above is a good example of someone having stereotypes about RF administrations without actually knowing their field of expertise... It's not the matter of "unlicensed application don't pay license fees so administrations don't want them" (even though whenever you want to move an application out of a band, someone has to pay for the new equipment. But that's another topic and various countries have various process for that), but a matter of the laws of physics : various frequency bands have various physical properties and this applies not only to radio propagation but also (maybe more importantly) to measurements related to the molecules you want to observe. There are reasons why some bands and not others are dedicated to radars (and even more : some bands are fully passive because they are required for calibration and scientific measurements). So yes there are weather radars in other bands than 5 Ghz... so what ? Different radars measure different things and they are complementary (just like having different low/high bands for mobile operators are complementary for them). Before saying that the use of spectrum is "absurdly wasteful", you should show your thorough knowledge of the topic...

Keep in mind that whenever a new application appears, detailed technical analysis and simulations have to be done with regards to the other applications in co-channel and adjacent channel/bands, both with regards to direct interference, aggregated interference taking into account the projected density of the new spectrum use, clutter/terrain, propagation models, geometries of antennas, filter characteristics, etc. And even then, administrations do their best to find the right balance and enable as many applications as possible (including unlicensed and SRD), but those are tradeoffs and sometimes administration take risks to foster innovation (and sometimes it proves it was too permissive for the new user, such as what is happening now with regards to wifi vs weather radars).

(N.B. I am not in the US, but I guess FCC works similarly to EU administrations - which I know very well).

I don't know the situation in the US and I don't think EU administrations require firmwares to be locked at the moment, yet I can tell that requesting locked hardware/firmware is a recurring debate within RF administrations since there were too many abuses (cf. this thread "just tell the hardware to lie" or "just use openwrt to disable DFS" above...) and too many interferences to other services (such as wifi-DFS-disabled interfering with weather-forecast radars). The 6 GHz wifi 6E has to coexist with fixed links, and administrations obviously don't want to repeat the mistakes and issues that are happening today at 5 GHz with radars...

Well, you are both showing that you know it is illegal, yet asking "what would be the consequences ?". Of course if you get caught you would both have your hardware confiscated and experience a very severe fine (and possibly worse than just a fine if there were consequences in terms of interferences).

People who operate radars (in particular radars for weather forecasts) are now really upset of the recurring interferences that come from wifi devices with (illegally) disabled DFS. Keep in mind that weather forecasts is not only about consumer people watching TV to know whether tomorrow will be sunny or rainy, but is also safety-related (e.g. for flights and navigation. You don't want your flight to be caught in a storm !).

Those issues (significant interferences that are now almost impossible to solve) are periodically raising debates within RF administrations about whether to require locked hardware (locked bootloader and signed firmwares) in order to ensure that DFS cannot be disabled. That would be a pity for any embedded linux geek (openwrt is great both with regards to freedom, privacy, long-term support with security updates and therefore avoiding obsolescence, etc.), but a lot of people now think that it is the only way...

I understand the shortcomings of DFS, yet you should really understand the 5 GHz wifi band is a band dedicated to radars as primary users where wifi has been tolerated under the condition of DFS, so wifi users should really not complain too much about the consequences and limitations of DFS (if there was no DFS, there would be no 5 GHz wifi band at all ! ;)

Also, as far as I understood, both GNU Gnash and Lightspark were using OpenGL for rendering. So I always expected that GPU would still bring some sort of acceleration for 2D path rendering ?

I though that there were some "GPU accelerated path rendering" already 10 years ago ? https://developer.nvidia.com/nv-path-rendering https://developer.nvidia.com/gpu-accelerated-path-rendering

(OK those links are for NVidia, but if they can do it I guess others can too ?) (also see https://www.researchgate.net/publication/262357352_GPU-accel... )

Thanks a lot for your software and platform ! (that I have been extensively using since 2 years !). In particular I love the fact that you only need to use an URL to join.

One suggestion though : the chat function is really limited (e.g. no way to resize the area. No convenient way to chat with only selected people within the meeting, no rich text...). Actually there were even some times when I have been using Jitsi with some people only for the chat functionality without audio/video (since it is one of the rare platforms that enable to join with just an URL without creating an account) yet I wish that the chat was a bit more sophisticated ;)

For large meetings, it would also be nice to see the hand raised in a list (so that people then take the floor in-order).

That's great ! Except

> Amiga Forever Value Edition comes in a dedicated Windows version, which is easy to install and run. If you do not intend to use Amiga Forever on a Windows system we recommend that you purchase the Plus Edition or the Premium Edition, which include both Windows and non-Windows content.

(so non-windows users cannot use the (much) cheaper edition...)

Yeah I also though the same : this justification is the wrong one (just configure your system or use a distro doesn't log on disk... e.g. OpenWRT doesn't log on NOR/NAND flash !). Regardless of logs, I totally understand that SD-cards are often unreliable (noting that RPi CM4 and also some alternatives such as some Orange Pi include an eMMC which is a bit more resilient). More generally, other justifications (more convincing than this logfile-on-SD issues) could be 1°/ the power consumption of the Pi, 2°/ the complexity of a Linux system (hence vulnerability / attack surface), 3°/ the supply chain shortages on Pis (and costs)...

Anyway, kudos to this board designers ! :)

> "People using the stimulator and their physicians could no longer access the proprietary software needed to recalibrate the device and maintain its effectiveness"

How is that even possible ? I would have expected that there would be proper regulations (either there is another company that would follow-up, or the aforementioned proprietary software would have to be open-sourced...)

From my experience, the mbox file from Google Takeout breaks some non-ASCII non-UTF8 characters from old emails you may have received (they are all replaced by 0xEFBFBD. No way to solve this). This issue does not happen when backuping emails with IMAP or GYB/GMvault (by the way I have written this little tool to use/explore GMVault backups https://github.com/karteum/gmvaultdb :).

It seems I'm not the only one experiencing those encoding issues with Google Takeout https://webapps.stackexchange.com/questions/71153/takeout-br...

There are cases where you might want to use Linux (for the hardware support, or for the userland) but without systemd: e.g. if you want to use musl libc, Lennard has said clearly he won't fix the incompatibility https://www.mail-archive.com/systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop... "we will rely on good APIs exposed in the generally accepted Linux API which is the one glibc exposes" (i.e. he won't integrate any required patch to make systemd work without glibc's nonstandard behaviors, and musl doesn't aim for a bug-for-bug compatibility with glibc).

Actually no it does not sound very good and I hope I'm wrong : I wish there would be some major discoveries that would still enable us to keep some degree of comfort / food safety / health safety (and a little bit of fun with high-tech for us geeks :) and restore our half-destroyed environment while still being 8 billion people on earth, but at the moment I am extremely pessimistic about the social and environmental consequences of oil/metals depletion * climate change, and how that transition (or collapse) will be handled (or not handled) to reach such a new equilibrium (where my guess is that anyway people will have to live with low-tech, whatever this means in terms of comfort/longevity/...).

Remember that the sustainable world (horses, sustainable agriculture, sailboats, windmills, medicine with herbs, low techs... that many people somehow idealize today) is precisely the one we left 2 centuries ago with the industrial revolution, and there were understandable reasons for that : fossil fuels are infinitely more concentrated than renewables, and all the industrial development they allowed enabled to secure food and health safety, holidays, etc. But now humans are addicted and dependent on those fossil fuels (in particular to sustain 8 billion people on earth), discovering that the party is over will leave us with an extremely bitter hangover. It's just a pity that humanity stupidly wasted all those resources and destroyed their environment so quickly while a different and less greedy economical/political model would have enabled us to live good lives for centuries...