Shitty companies did it like that back then - and shitty companies still don’t properly utilize what easy tools they have available for controlled deployment nowayads. So nothing really changed, just that the amount of people (and with that, amount of morons) skyrocketed.
I had automated builds out of CVS with deployment to staging, and option to deploy to production after tests over 15 years ago.
As a non-Windows-user I see that as a good thing. LLMs are not going away - but that kind of nonsense at least will make sure all PCs will eventually have cheap and reasonably fast AI acceleration. Which is required for killing off centrally hosted LLMs (plus nvidias cash grabbing)
Intel is well known for requiring a new board for each new CPU generation, even if it is the same socket. AMD on the other hand is known to push stuff to its physical limits before they break compatibility.
Had to look that lawyer bit up as it just sounded too much like Gravenreuth - and indeed it was.
There is nothing like this availlable currently. Framework probably comes closest, but they only sell in a few countries, and there is lots of stuff to dislike about their solutions - but building your own around a framework board might be feasible.
I have two mnt reforms - as you said, slow and expensive. They have their use for work prototyping for me, but generally wouldn’t recommend. They also have the worst keyboard I’ve encountered in a notebook in the last decade.
Generally yes, but you still need hardware support (mostly kernel and mesa). They upstream - but generally you currently want packages built from their git for that.
Also the installer is very mac hardware specific.
A lot of the Zen based APUs don’t support ECC. The next thing is if it supports registered or unregistered modules - everything up to threadripper is unregistered (though I think some of the pro parts are registered), Epycs are registered.
That makes a huge difference in how much RAM you can add, and how much you pay for it.
Is it a ‘death by quantity’ thing?
Pretty much that - those companies rely on open projects to sort it for them, so they’re pretty much scraping open databases, and selling good data they pull from there. That’s why they were complaining about the kernel stuff - the info required was there already, just you needed to put effort in, so they were asking for CVEs. Now they got their CVEs - but to profit from it they’d still need to put the same effort in as they’d had to without CVEs in place.
Short version: A bunch of shitty companies have as business model to sell open databases to companies to track security vulnerabilities - at pretty much zero effort to themselves. So they’ve been bugging the kernel folks to start issuing CVEs and do impact analysis so they have more to sell - and the kernel folks just went “it is the kernel, everything is critical”
tl;dr: this is pretty much an elaborate “go fuck yourself” towards shady ‘security’ companies.
Making an exception for one organisation, pressured by politicians, would be harmful. BBC has the following policy about neutral reporting:
We don’t use loaded words like “evil” or “cowardly”. We don’t talk about “terrorists”. And we’re not the only ones to follow this line. Some of the world’s most respected news organisations have exactly the same policy
One fascinating example is one owner that replaced the DC barrel jack with a USB-C port, so they could utilize USB-PD for external power.
Oddly enough that’s also an example for bad design in that notebook: The barrel jack is soldered in. With a module that is plugged into the board that’d be significantly easier to replace - and also provide strain relief for power jack abuse. All my old thinkpads were trivial to move to USB-C PD because they use a separate power jack with attached cable.
The transparent bottom also isn’t very functional - it is pretty annoying to remove and put back, due to the large amount of screws required. For a notebook designed for tinkering I’d have wanted some kind of quick release for that. Also annoying is the lack of USB ports on the board - there’s enough space to integrate a USB hub, but just doing that on the board and providing extra ports would’ve been way more sensible.
The CPU module also is a bit of a mixed bag - it pretty much is designed for the first module they developed, and later modules don’t have full support for the existing ports. I was expecting that, though - many projects trying to offer that kind of modular upgrade path run into that sooner or later, and for that kind of small project with all its teething problems ‘sooner’ was to be expected. It still is very interesting for some prototyping needs - but that’s mostly companies or very dedicated hackers, not the average linux user.
It starts with them only doing initial talks about buying their hardware for a project with you for a 7-figure payment, and doesn’t improve from there.
A problem of this bubble is that it is making AI synonymous with LLM - and when it goes down will burn other more sensibly forms of AI.
It surely is a bubble - so probably a bit different than many other bubbles.
I think OpenAI made the right call (for them) to commercialize when they did - as that pretty much was their only chance to do so. Things has moved fast over the last 1.5 years - and what used to take a decade in tech has happened within months: OpenAI is the dinosaur company grandfathered in, while for already about a year it’s been more sensible for anybody wanting to do something with LLM to selfhost (or buy hosting capacity, but put up own data) one of the more open language models, and possibly adjust or re-train it.
As a company owner I get a ridiculous amount of spam for a year already from all kinds of companies building products on top of OpenAI stack, or are trying to sell training or conferences. All those companies will be left with nothing once all the slower users realize technology has moved on. It’s like somebody trying to build all their product offerings based on VMWare stack nowadays.
If you as a company want to offer something around AI right now the safest option is probably offering hosting, or if you want to do more hands on, adjustment of open models. Both of those are very risky, and many will go bust in years to come - but not as suicidal as building on top of a closed dinosaur.
I see you’re not working in any industry having to deal with Qualcomm.
I nowadays typically have three outcomes to similare situations:
RAM is cheap, and even if you’re just doing absolute basic shit your current PC will work better with 16GB of RAM (also looking at you here, Apple). If it’s not a phone you’re buying don’t get anything with less than 16GB.
Wall is a linguist, which influenced several of his design choices. You have a wide variety of expressing what you want in perl, just as with natural languages - some ways are maybe a bit harder to read for newcomers, while others are not worse than something like python. Typically you’d have coding guides for projects.
I did a webchat in perl in the 90s, and eventually rewrote it in php3 - php was easier to manage properly isolated between users than perl via the CGI interface, so it became popular with hosters very quickly. I went back to doing all my web scripting in perl once I started hosting my own servers,though.
For an inkjet printer with paper feed issues pulling it through a few times might actually fix those - the print head should be far enough away from the paper that it will not get damaged, and there shouldn’t be other parts close enough. I’ve prolonged quite a few inkjet printers life in the 90s by just sanding the rollers a bit (in some cases you could even get maintenance kits from the manufacturers - which just would be an overpriced tiny piece of sandpaper).
In a laser printer I’d be worried about some of the internals, though.
Did pretty much the same with a new server recently - spent ages debugging why it didn’t find the SAS disks. Turns out, disks like to have power connected, and no amount of debugging on software level will help you.