gatmne

5 ms·

1.
by gatmne 9y ago
You can add my business to GP's. I'm currently in the market for stock photos. The allotted budget isn't one those folk would miss, but it's more than enough to commission our own. As a direct response to getty's be
2.
by gatmne 9y ago
If you're in a situation where throwaway-hardware makes sense, you'll care how the throwing-away is actually done. While not throwaway hardware, the company I work for destroys hard drives and other persistent memory devices befor
3.
by gatmne 9y ago
In an industry where "kill and reap all children" is a valid technical statement, I see no issue with shaving beaver images. Both have valid technical meanings.
4.
by gatmne 9y ago
That's fine and dandy if you can afford to put up the resources to keep your deployment up to date. For more constrained others, an LTS release can be the deference between using the project vs not.
5.
by gatmne 9y ago
As a guy who likes the stability traditional vendors provide as apposed to the madness that is chasing hip upstream developers, the mere fact that your working on providing LTS guarantees gives you a significant advantage over your competit
6.
by gatmne 9y ago
It will also tell you that pumping horses full of steroids will make them go faster. Tech's absurd obsession with metrics and statistics will be their undoing.
7.
by gatmne 9y ago
I don't. Should I? Why?
8.
by gatmne 9y ago
> What do the vendors gain by this 'land grab'? One thing is that it could be used to as a venue to pursue new recurring revenue streams. While not exactly the same thing, I've seen some people joke about intel locking own
9.
by gatmne 9y ago
Just wait when coca-cola and friends fill the skies with their own logo constellations when (not if) space technology gets cheap enough. After all, it only needs to be cheaper than conventional ad campaigns to be viable. Imagine going campi
10.
by gatmne 9y ago
>We base so much of human progress on these little wafers of silicon, it shouldn't be extreme to want to know what they do. Well said. I'll add that security is a threshold, and that computer systems are extremely complex. Ever
11.
by gatmne 9y ago
This is nonsense. What you describe is the current state of affairs for CPUs. Intel, AMD, ARM, and every other company working in this space already "put all of their stupidity inside it in the name of features and security". Thes
12.
by gatmne 9y ago
I noticed that the repository is served from a KDE domain. Is this an official KDE project? Also, How usable is this for building GUIs on Windows? Does it play nice with QT creator? (I'm still inexperienced with QT development so pleas
13.
by gatmne 9y ago
Software that collects and sends back any form of information is a big no-no unless it's opt-in. It's not acceptable when vscode does it. It's not acceptable when .net-core does it. It isn't acceptable when Luna does it.
14.
by gatmne 9y ago
I was thinking about this recently. I think this type of consolidation starts to make sense if you think of software as mathematics. A formula gets devised, iterated upon and refined, adopted, and then finally built upon. It makes more sens
15.
by gatmne 9y ago
It's a shame. From past examples, we will likely not see any real innovation in this space until these patents expire. It's especially disheartening to me since I'll probably be too old to get in on the action by then. I hope
16.
by gatmne 9y ago
Why should they bother communicating clearly with their customers? Who are those customers going to turn to? AMD? ARM? Between Intel's numerous CPU bugs that they refused to refund customers for and ME, it's crystal clear what Int
17.
by gatmne 9y ago
Hopefully, this would be it. But rather than damages, the courts would rule that access to one's own device is protected by a fundamental right.
18.
by gatmne 9y ago
I doubt they did it out of a desire to better serve users in Germany.
19.
by gatmne 9y ago
Cars and planes (and even radio transmission equipment) pose a high risk on public safety. They aren't restricted because owners don't have the right to control these devices, they are restricted because public safety is at risk o
20.
by gatmne 9y ago
The fact that they are required to allow owners access is what I hope the lawsuit would address.
21.
by gatmne 9y ago
What about suing for full control over a product you own?
22.
Ask HN: Why haven't processor manufacturers been sued yet?
1 points by gatmne 9y ago|9 comments
23.
by gatmne 9y ago
Until a vulnerability is found in ARM TrustZone.
24.
by gatmne 9y ago
At the time of this reply, there are at least five competing definitions being argued for and against in this thread; some either requiring that the input and output be machine code or disallowing it, some necessitating that both input and
25.
by gatmne 9y ago
What's the distinction between Compile and transpile then? and is this distinction agreed upon and meaningful?
26.
by gatmne 9y ago
My point exactly!
27.
by gatmne 9y ago
> some people seem to think there's a useful distinction being made What is that distinction? Excluding the javascript crowd, I doubt this phrase will see extensive use in the field until the term gets properly defined and is meanin
28.
by gatmne 9y ago
Agreed especially given that "transpile" lacks a well-defined meaning. Just ask folks how this term differentiates from Compile and you'll get wildly varying answers and definitions.
29.
by gatmne 9y ago
>RMS remains a rambling nutjob and none of this is really applicable to the issue at hand. Ramblings that this industry has repeatedly proven to be correct, and continue to do so. I'd take his ramblings over a cheap ad hominem any d
30.
by gatmne 9y ago
> These numbers have also been consistently going down over time. That trend might reverse if vulnerabilities like these continue to surface.

More ›