cmhe

joined 2 years ago
[–] cmhe 7 points 6 months ago (1 children)

But to install from local storage, you first download or fetch a storage medium from a remote location with the file on it. There isn't that much of a difference IMO.

I would not call it side-loading when I download a file and then install it on the same device. Because that is how it has always worked. I never before heard people describing downloading and executing a setup.exe as "side-loading".

[–] cmhe 13 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago) (3 children)

Until some time ago, I always though that "side-loading" is something different. Since I first saw "side-loading" used in ADB, so I thought that it means using another system on the side to load and install software onto a target system.

So to me that seems fitting, but now it seems to be used differently. How is installing software using just one device "side-loading". What side do they mean?

[–] cmhe 15 points 6 months ago

It is Oblivion, so the crash might be unrelated.

[–] cmhe 17 points 6 months ago

Yeah, and when it was about releasing the titles as open source games as well.

[–] cmhe -3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Sure. However there is a difference between "NEWS is a acroym for something" and much more hurtful and/or political/commercial motivated spread of misinformation.

[–] cmhe 4 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

JUSTIZWACHTMEISTEREI

[–] cmhe -3 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I don't agree with the generalization here. Sure, it is generally advisable not to rely on security through obscurity, but depending on the use-cases and purpose it can be effective.

I dislike DRM systems with a passion, but they, especially those for video games like denuvo, can be quite effective, if the purpose is to protect against copying something for a short time until it gets cracked.

Otherwise I agree that software developed in the open is intrinsically more secure, because it can be verified by everyone.

However, many business and governments like to have support contracts so want to be able to sue and blame someone else than themselves if something goes wrong. This is in most cases easier with closed source products with a specific legal entity behind it, not a vague and loose developer community or even just a single developer.

[–] cmhe 18 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (2 children)

Why would Disney demand that?

Why would they choose slack if they want to host, maintain and be responsible for the internal chat themselves?

They choose slack because they do it for them so that they don't have to do it themselves. That is the selling point for them.

Businesses buy cloud services, because they do not want to manage stuff themselves.

[–] cmhe 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

Protects against what?

What I read here is just a vague critic from him of the relation between hard- and software developer. Which will not change just because the ISA is open source. It will take some iterations until this is figured out, this is inevevable.

Soft- and hardware developers are experts in their individual fields, there are not many with enough know-how of both fields to be effective.

Linus also points out, that because of ARM before, RISC-V might have a easier time, on the software side, but mistakes will still happen.

IMO, this article doesn't go into enough depths of the RISC-V specific issues, that it warrants RISC-V in the title, it would apply to any up and coming new ISA.

[–] cmhe 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

My point is there never will be enough people to leave. Consumer boycotts do not work.

Between thousands of different factors to consider wherever to buy a product from a certain producer or not, child labor, environmental waste, political attitude of the CEO, etc... it isn't possible to make any decision on what product to consume.

It isn't about 'unless enough people leave" it is about "unless enough people protest to the government for market regulation" and "unless enough law makers care".

The free market is not self regulating, at least not with a long term positive effect.

view more: ‹ prev next ›