If I'm not mistaken doesn't the firmware in question get uploaded to the device in question and run on said device not the host CPU? Those devices are already closed and often already running proprietary firmware. I don't really understand the war against uploading blobs to them? I love FOSS and more power to anyone who wants to do this but it seems excessive.
Scoopta
joined 2 years ago
It's not though, there is no NSFW content in that image. This community is for posting hentai, not a place for discussing issues with the instance (even if it relates to this community). Most instances have some sort of meta community for that purpose.
Idk if there's a meta community but this feels like the wrong place to post this
It was part of season 1 but season 1 wasn't in 2 parts...
Look, I love FOSS and open platforms, to the point that I will only run proprietary software if it is sufficiently sandboxed AND there is no alternative. Unfortunately, hardware just isn't there right now. You basically cannot have a modern computing experience on fully open hardware. At some point you have to make a compromise with it, it's unfortunate but it's the world we live in. Typically that compromise is either all open software with closed hardware and firmware, or all open software and firmware, with incredibly old or restricted hardware (which is still closed). I have yet to see any solution that involves truly, fully open hardware and so you basically have to just draw an arbitrary line and say "this is good enough."
Sounds pretty nifty, I'll definitely check it out
I'll have to test that, I have 16C/32T so I'll try dropping my compiles down and see if I do get diminishing returns. Never really considered that. Also I do not use CCache, I'll have to check it out though because it does sound really useful.
The IP suite is not nearly as neatly layered as OSI was and the OSI model doesn't neatly fit the IP suite since it wasn't actually designed for IP at all. In the IP suite layers 5 and 6 basically don't exist in the OSI sense, TCP handles things that are part of both layers 4 and 5 in the model despite being a single protocol, etc. The OSI model is often considered obselete as it just doesn't actually fit the IP world all that well but it's been around so long and does have uses in certain situations that it tends to stick around.
No idea, I use mercurial mostly
What does the ChromeOS of Linux even mean? ChromeOS is already Linux
I have a friend who won't leave windows because of League...in fact when we work on projects together I often have symlinks in my repo and he won't even turn on developer mode to deal with them because it means if he wants to play league he has to restart his computer since it breaks the anti-cheat...so I have to make sure to desymlinkify any repo I expect him to clone...it's cursed how much of a hold a stupid game can have.
To be clear, I'm not saying I don't want open hardware, what I'm saying is I don't get the point of allowing closed hardware that doesn't require a firmware blob as opposed to closed hardware that does. That's a very arbitrary and silly line that does nothing useful. They're going on this crusade of "no blobs." But why? There's lots of hardware that already has closed blobs on the HW, but because it's not uploaded by the driver those blobs are ok? You either have to say all closed firmware is bad and we're going to take a stance against any devices which have any amount of closed firmware, even when shipped on ROM in the HW. Or, closed firmware is tolerable so long as the driver is fully FOSS. I love the idea of not having closed firmware but I just don't get the intellectual inconsistency here.