Microsoft seems to have deleted all their old blog posts around it (at least all the links to their responses 404 now), but…

In 2011, they were going to require it to be enabled for all products if they wanted to announce Windows 8 support.

After huge backlash, they changed it to allow motherboard companies to disable it for X years (since I can’t find the original, I can’t say the exact length of time)

But their original goal was for it to never be allowed to be disabled

postmarketos has builds for the 4/5, and Fairphone has already submitted devicetree files for the 6 to the mainline Linux kernel: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-pm/20250625-sm7635-fp6-initial-v1-12-d9cd322eac1b@fairphone.com/

Did that, did a lot of that. There wasn’t any doctor here who could shine my eyes. Not even for 20 menthol cools. Was anything you said true?

For unplayable, Rocket League had very good Linux and macos native builds. Epic required them to delete support for those operating systems as part of the acquisition of Psyonix

When they buy publishers, they had them actively remove Linux support, such as Rocket League

Wow. This opengoal project is so cool!

You made me dig through old boxes to find my Jak games. I know what I’m doing this weekend :)

Yeah, their branding makes it harder to recover.

I don’t know how they’ll change their versioning in the future, so I just went with that.

If they don’t make an obvious split to when the extension system is stable, they may never get that new beloved version like KDE managed

GNOME 2 was different and easy to customize

GNOME is still in their KDE 4.x days where it needs time to mature.

KDE 3 was loved, KDE 4 made a ton of breaking changes, and was reviled. KDE 5/6 are now butter smooth and fixed all the issues from the 3 -> 4 transition

GNOME 4/5 will probably come back into the loved category if they start stabilizing the extension system some more

Oh, damn. He’s going against Trump’s statements here, so Trump is certainly asking someone to google how he can fire the VP.

Could lead for some funny interactions soon

So, would your suspicion be that it’s causing them more failed boards in production?

I guess if it’s reducing returns, that might be something they’re accepting as a tradeoff?

They already have one: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum

Offering another empty promise is unlikely to cause them to make concessions again

Fixed, thanks

Their statement is that Alpine is designed to be friendly to corporations who want to lock down their devices and prevent you from modifying them.

You cannot use coreutils and have a DRM locked down device.

You can use Alpine w/ musl + busybox and make a DRM locked down device

Alpine’s licensing favors large corporation’s rights in preventing the user from modifying their device

Operating systems using coreutils favor the end user’s rights

If they can take my unlocked device by force, they can probably also break my fingers to coerce me to unlock it See also: https://xkcd.com/538/

Randall is right in pointing out you need to consider your attack vectors, but this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t take reasonable precautions

Most people are more likely to run into the type of attack OP references than someone who can break LUKS encryption stealing their device

My naive reading is the difference here is HP slapped a discount sticker on it without changing the price.

Where Kohls, et. al. set the price extremely high and then always have it “on sale.”

Now, how companies get away with doing the same thing for Black Friday, no idea

I wasn’t confident which requirement you were missing, but I love that error

https://github.com/torvalds/linux/blob/master/include/math-emu/double.h#L29

The default in systemd, unless your distribution has modified it either globally, or for a specific service, is 90 seconds

That’s already how it functionally worked for each major release

Here’s their previous strategy: https://web.archive.org/web/20220917195332/source.android.com/docs/setup/about/codelines

Google works internally on the next version of the Android platform and framework according to the product’s needs and goals

When the n+1th version is ready, it’s published to the public source tree

The source management strategy above includes a codeline that Google keeps private to focus attention on the current public version of Android.

We recognize that many contributors disagree with this approach and we respect their points of view. However, this is the approach we feel is best and the one we’ve chosen to implement for Android.

As far as I can tell, this would really only affect QPRs, since the public experimental branches that get made after they throw the next release over the wall is going away

There’s no chance in hell Vance knows what that phrase means