Youtube staff needs to be completely gutted, and the site should undergo a complete overhaul. It's damn-near inoperable on non-chrome browser and that does tend to create a monopoly...
edit: I can't even use the site without overriding my useragent with a blank one... WHY IS THAT I WONDER?
Lol: microsoft is about to destroy themselves with copilot (the damages have already been done). Their government welfare program (22 billion for AR beta test) is already a failure. Nobody wants to use windows 11 unless they are forced. Still DESPERATELY trying to monopolize the gaming market. They're a floating textbook example of antitrust, and about to get flushed. I hope the enabling shareholders all go down with them. Maybe not the textbook example easily explained to a lay-person, but their behavior does in fact tend to create a monopoly, and I challenge you to find a jury that would disagree.
Indeed it is nonsense, web scraping (DMCA archive exemption) and DVR's (time shifting) are both well established as legal practices. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/25/business/media/court-upho... -- So RIAA can STFU and get back to trying to figure out how to better exploit the trash-tier "artists" they've been trying to force everyone to listen to through shady deals and control of media channels/spectra that they only control through artificial scarcity provided by the FCC.
Two things: I don't watch streams NOR do I play videos higher than 720p. Will the number of ads I see be an accurate reflection of my overall load on their system or will everyone be subjected to this 5->10 commercial barbarism? If this means I don't get ambushed by 5 ads at peak moments mid-stream (requiring me to waste time watching ad AND rewinding...), the ad count is fair reflection of user load, and the money goes to real producers instead of enriching executive quality-of-life or funding some new dystopian censorship corps, then OK.
30% seems a bit off, though yeah dense metal magnets in transformers and speakers are probably what keeps these products >= $100. Transistors, etc, are cheap as hell though. Some of this assembled gear is thousands of dollars and beyond, per single unit... So if you can build your own magnets, cases and push shipping off to the customer while providing 2x greater than behringer *quality*, I want to believe.
This "security" feature confuses the hell out of me. HOW in the sam hill are they going to prove every process running with privileges is in a "secure" state, how can that be possible? Even with constant wasteful memory scans there could be data files that evade micro-brother. So what if it booted in an authentic manner, the user could have tampered with any number of privileged processes, and the second they opened one of THREE web browser engines and ran some unknown 3'rd party advertisement code all bets are off. Not even going to get into malicious firmware/drivers that microsoft will happily sign (see: lenovo superfish, or razer driver menu privilege escalation for recent examples). This is more security theatrics from the same old players, when will it stop? When will all you supporters see what is happening? This is more about operational control than security; it makes me sick to see so-called hackers supporting such an obvious trap. Yall need to dump your shares and join the right side of history because it only gets worse until the weight of oppression ignites a revolution. If you're still holding, think about what is the next "security" frontier after you let them have this? Require every program on the OS, and then every website to sign javascript with cryptographic keys they don't have root control over? GTFO board room members, you're drunk. You want to throw out our freedoms just because microsoft and intel designed a garbage (UEFI) spec that doesn't have a way to physically prevent writes, and damn near requires you to use an ancient FAT filesystem? WHY WOULD YOU TRUST THEM NOT TO BOTCH THIS ONE TOO?
That may be true, though the problem with releasing such a high profile exploit is that it's patched quickly. So IMO anyone with access to hardware / talent required to crack the xbox is probably sitting on that knowledge and extracting as much value as possible from it, instead of taking it public.
>I think this is where we are headed with Microsoft and Linux.
It's been doing this already for some time now. The list of kernel devs on their directly taxable payroll grows each year, as more and more weird features are implemented that nobody outside of giant industry (google, facebook, oracle, etc) ever wanted but are now stuck with running in ring 0 on their PC's/phones. The time to fork was years ago, though there is always the opportunity of a rewrite/revolution; we have to move beyond GPLv2 to break free from the artificial encrypted (tivoized) cages built by these industrialist hacks.
Security and x86? I would maybe not hate this if there were a stipulation that these companies must move beyond x86 with a completely new architecture, something more reasonable for the modern era. Theres too much legacy crud that just muddies the waters when trying to learn how to program these contraptions. Maybe some way to completely disable speculative / out-of-order execution. What are WE getting out of this? By WE I mean non-giant-chip-conglomerate shareholders/welfare queens.
You can multiplex optical signals, though im not sure exactly how that would be harnessed. If nothing else, at least a few times more possible throughput?
buf is a pointer to a pipe_buffer array, this whole function wreaks yes, but i don't think this is a simple "initialization would have fixed" bug
buf = &pipe->bufs[i_head & p_mask];
i think it is a problem with merging and needing to reset the flags, but i didn't want to waste too much time really trying to find the root issue and wtf merging is/why do it.
Liquid piston engine (basically an inverted rotary/wankel) can run on hydrogen, also fuel cells, checkmate. Not even going to click the link. Is research even a thing anymore? Petrol is the cult, you've got the whole headline backwards!
It's always fun to read peoples drive-by opinions about the only decent language IMO. Ada is highly compatible with C code. For dynamic allocations with "ownership" there is the concept of memory pools which CAN use a GC if thats how you choose to implement the pool allocator.
what i tell myself is that it's because ipv6 uses 128 bits, vs ipv4 32 bit addresses. so its 4x V4 addresses. Still makes little sense, but at least it's something, heh.