There’s some inherent risk in the ad blocker as well, though. If it’s an extension, you’re trusting that this thing you installed, that can read and modify every website you visit, isn’t going to do anything sneaky. Yes, maybe it’s open source, but every once in a while something sneaks into open source projects, too. It will get caught, but it could be after the damage is done.
I mean, I use an ad blocker. But I don’t think it’s unreasonable to value security and not use one.
The benefits massively outweigh the risks when it comes to open source ad blockers (lets be honest, we’re all talking about uBO), but limiting your attack surface is a very widely practiced concept in cubersecurity, and there’s no situation where it is totally without merit.
Edward fucking Snowden has recommend Signal and I think if anyone knows whether it’s secure, it’s probably him and the NSA.
That and he is paranoid to a point where he physically kills all mics and cameras on his devices, so if he claims anything is secure, I will believe him unconditionally.
This is how you know the brain has rotten and become a slick turd.
Agreed. Making it a contest of “this talking head seems smarter” means exactly that.
Try explaining that to normies though. They don’t want to understand shit, and they want to think they are safe without understanding shit. That this is impossible they just don’t want to believe, because they don’t understand shit.
I absolutely aim to challenge this kind of crap. If I leave, I doubt there will be people who will do it consistently. People want to follow X, Y and Z cults but not A, B and C cults, and think they are rational. Rationalists can come up with the most irrational nonsense, which is why they are not rational.
That you can’t do something well or at all without understanding it is philosophy. Philosophy is weak in the sense that it exists on the same level as aesthetics or instincts. So it’s fighting instinct in a system built to make crowd management through instinct convenient, - in disadvantaged position.
Also NT people like to champion their stupidest ideas as a banner to assemble under. Stupidest exactly to exclude any rational reason, so that only the feeling of community would remain.
They don’t always say what they mean. They might say “this thing is better”, but what they mean is “I’m with the group which distinguishes itself by support for this thing, don’t be against us”.
so if he claims anything is secure, I will believe him unconditionally.
That’s much more stupid than just using Facebook and unencrypted e-mail with Outlook address for communication, but knowing how safe exactly those are.
In my entirely anecdotal experience, MacOS is significantly better at RAM management than Windows. But it's still a $1,600 USD computer, and 16GB of RAM costs nearly nothing, it's just classic Apple greed.
The main metric has been with Adobe apps. 2017 Macs with 8GB of RAM are still able to run Premiere and a few others things smoothly simultaneously. Windows machines with the same config were crashing constantly and kept going.
But I'm still not defending Apple here. It's been 6 years, and their base level MacBook still ships with the same amount of RAM.
It’s not anecdotal in the least. It’s been widely tested. There’s a reason an M1 Mac mini with 8GB of RAM can load and fully support over 100 tracks in Logic Pro. The previous Intel machines would buckle with just a few.
ARM is not comparable to x86-64. The former is totally unified, the latter totally modular.
As a fellow risc-v supporter, I think the rise of arm is going to help risc-v software support and eventually adoption. They’re not compatible, but right now developers everywhere are working to ensure their applications are portable and not tied to x86. I imagine too that when it comes to emulation, emulating arm is going to be a lot easier than x86, possibly even statically recompilable.
This is what concerns me. ARM could dominate the market because almost everyone would develop apps supporting it and leave RISC-V behind. It could become like Itanium vs AMD64 all over again.
Well right now most people develop apps supporting x86 and leaves everything else behind. If they’re supporting x86 + arm, maybe adding riscv as a third option would be a smaller step than adding a second architecture
Porting Windows exclusive games to Linux is a small step as well, but most developers don’t do it because they cannot justify the additional QA and debugging time required to port them over. Especially since Linux’s market share is small.
The reason Itanium failed was because the architecture was too different from x86 and porting x86 applications over required significant effort and was error prone.
For RISC-V to even get any serious attention from developers, I think they need to have appx 40-50% market share with OEMs alongside ARM. Otherwise, RISC-V will be seen as a niche architecture and developers would avoid porting their applications to it.
My point is that “porting” is not such a big deal if it is just recompile. If you already target Linux with a portable code base ( to support both ARM and amd64 for example ) then the burden of RISC-V is pretty low. Most of the support will be the same between RISC-V and ARM if they target the same Linux distros.
The Linux distros themselves are just a recompile as well and so the entire Open Source ecosystem will be available to RISC-V right away.
It is a very different world from x86 vs Itanium with amd64 added to the mix.
Look at Apple Silicon. Fedora already has a full distribution targeting Apple Silicon Macs. The biggest challenges have been drivers, not the ISA. The more complete the Linux ecosystem is on ARM, the easier it will be to create distros for RISC-V as well.
Porting Windows games to Linux is not a small step. It is massive and introduces a huge support burden. That is much different than just recompiling your already portable and already Linux hosted applications to a new arch.
With games, I actually hope the Win32 API becomes the standard on Linux as well because it is more stable and reduces the support burden on game studios. It may even be ok if they stay x86-64. Games leverage the GPU more than the CPU and so are not as greatly impacted running the CPU under emulation.
That is a risk on the Windows side for sure. Also, once an ISA becomes popular ( like Apple Silicon ) it will be hard to displace.
Repurposing Linux software for RISC-V should be easy though and I would expect even proprietary software that targets Linux to support it ( if the support anything beyond x86-64 ).
Itanium was a weird architecture and you either bet on it or you did not. RISC and ARM are not so different.
The other factor is that there is a lot less assembly language being used and, if you port away from x64, you are probably going to get rid of any that remains as part of that ( making the app more portable ).
Once a chip architecture gets popular on Windows, it will be hard to displace. ARM has already become popular on macOS ( via Apple Silicon ) so we know that is not going anywhere. If ARM becomes popular on Windows ( perhaps via X Elite ), it will be hard to displace as the more popular option. That makes RISC-V on Windows a more difficult proposition.
I do not think that RISC-V on Linux has the same obstacles other than that most hardware will be manufactured for Windows or Mac and will use the chips popular with those operating systems.
8GB for this price in 2023 is a SCAM. All Apple devices are a SCAM. Many pay small fortunes for luxurious devices full of spyware and which they have absolutely no control over. It’s insane. They like to be chained in their golden shackles.
Agree with you on the price, disagree with the sentiment. Unless you’re comparing to a linux machine it is a bad take. You can do plenty to MacOS and it isn’t constantly trying to reinstall fucking one drive or hijack my search bar or reset my privacy settings after an update.
I don’t trust MacOS, its proprietary code obviously hides evil spying and control functions over the user. Apple has always been an enemy of the free software community because it is not in favor of its loyal customers but only its greedy shareholders. There is no balance, Apple has always adopted anti-competitive measures. That’s just to say the least.
they also made the chip so it’s not much of a defence
It’s a pretty old chip though. They shipped it over a year ago and even that was mostly just an upgrade from LPDDR4 to LPDDR5. Which is a substantial upgrade, real world performance wise, but most of the engineering work would’ve been done by whoever makes the memory - not Apple’s own chip design team who presumably were working on something else (I’d guess desktop/laptop chips, and those certainly do have USB-3).
Apple certainly could have included USB-3 support in those chips… but three years ago there wasn’t any pressing reason to that so and this year they’ve added support for the models with the most expensive camera. And anyone who cares about data transfer speeds will buy the one with the best camera.
It’s not even USB 3 it’s USB 2 delivered via USB-C. Because that’s something everybody wants isn’t it, slow charging on a modern standard that should be faster and indeed is faster on every other budget Android phone.
Apple has always been an enemy of the free software community
Apple is one of the largest contributors to open source software in the world and they’ve been a major contributor to open source since the early 1980’s. Yes, they have closed source software too… but it’s all built on an open foundation and they give a lot back to the open source community.
LLVM for example, was a small project nobody had ever heard of in 2005, when Apple hired the university student who created it, gave him an essentially unlimited budget to hire a team of more people, and fast forward almost two decades it’s by far the best compiler in the world used by both modern languages (Rust/Swift/etc) and old languages (C, JavaScript, Fortran…) and it’s still not controlled in any way by Apple. The uni student they hired was Chris Lattner, he is still president of LLVM now even though he’s moved on (currently CEO of an AI startup called Modular AI).
Well, look at the annual contribution that Apple makes to the BSD team and see that Apple uses several open source software in its products but with minimal financial contribution. Even more so for a company of this size. Apple only “donates” when it is in its interest that such software is ready for it to use.
You know I have software on my PC old enough I can’t run it even in compatibility mode, I’d need to spin up a VM to run it or a pseudoVM like DOSBox, it’s not unheard of it’s not even uncommon.
That’s too simplistic. For example, the entry level M1 MacBook Air is hands down one of the best value laptops. It’s very hard to find anything nearly as good for the price.
On the high end, yeah you can save $250-400 buying a similarly specced HP Envy or Acer Swift or something. These are totally respectable with more ports, but they have 2/3rd the battery life, worse displays, and tons of bloatware. Does that make them “not a scam”?
(I’m actually not sure what “spyware” you’re referring to, especially compared to Windows and Chromebooks.)
I 'm not refering to Windows or ChromeOS ( that are full of spyware too ) . The first generation of Mac M1 had a reasonably more “accessible” price precisely to encourage users to migrate to ARM technology and consequently also encourage developers to port their software, and not because Apple was generous. Far from it.Everything Apple does in the short or long term is to benefit itself.
And not to mention that it is known that Apple limits both hardware and software on its products to force consumers to pay the “Apple Idiot Tax”. There is no freedom whatsoever in these products, true gilded cages. Thank you, but I don’t need it. Software and hardware freedom are more important.
I didn’t claim that Apple is doing anything to be “generous”. That seems like it’s moving the goal posts. Say, are other PC manufacturers doing things out of generosity? Which ones?
Even the M2 and M3 Macs are a good value if you want the things they’re good at. For just a few hundred more, no other machine has the thermal management or battery life. Very few have the same build quality or displays. If you’re using it for real professional work, even just hours of typing and reading, paying a few extra hundred over the course of years for these features is hardly a “scam”.
You didn’t elaborate on your “spyware” claim. Was that a lie? And now you claim it’s “known” that Apple limits hardware and software. Can you elaborate?
MacBooks do have excellent screens, software integration and everything else, that’s a fact and I don’t take that away from Apple. But the problem is that it’s not worth paying for this in exchange for a system that is completely linked to your Apple ID, tracking all your behavior for advertising purposes and whatever else Apple decides. Privacy and freedom are worth more. If you can’t check the source code you can’t trust what Apple says, they can lie for their own interests. Have you ever read Apple’s privacy policy regarding Apple ID, for example? If not, I recommend it.
What you said got me worried, so I looked into the claim that it is “tracking all your behavior for advertising purposes and whatever else Apple decides”. That’s a convincing concern, and you’ve changed my mind on this. I don’t see any evidence that they’re doing anything close to this level of tracking — the main thing they seem to track is your Mac App Store usage — but they may have the potential to do so in the enshittified future. That gives me pause.
Apple has repeatedly stressed that they’re privacy focused in the past, while a major departure from that could happen absolutely it feels a bit like borrowing trouble to assume it will happen soon. Google is an advertising company first, microsoft is just a mess, but Apple is a luxury hardware producer, they have minimal reason to damange their reputation in a way that would make those sorts of consumers upset.
Please note that I’m not saying it’s impossible just unlikely in the near future
That assessment sounds right. I think we just need to stay vigilant as consumers. We have defeasible reason to trust Apple right now. But we’ve seen, especially recently, what happens when we let corporations take advantage of that hard earned trust for short term gain.
When compared to other professional level laptops the macbooks do put up a good fight. They have really high quality displays which accounts for some of the cost and of course compared to a commercial grade laptop like a thinkpad the prices get a lot closer(when they arent on sale like thinkpads frequently do).
That said even then the m1 macbook is over a thousand dollars after tax and that gets you just 256GB of storage and 8GB of ram. Theyre annoyingly not as easy to find as intel offerings but you can find modern ryzen laptops that can still give you into the teens of screen on time for less with way more ram and storage space. The m1 is still the better chip in terms of power per watt and battery life overall, but then getting the ram and storage up to spec can make it $700 more than a consumer grade ryzen.
They have really high quality displays which accounts for some of the cost and of course compared to a commercial grade laptop like a thinkpad
Is that important for a professional laptop? I mean, if you use it for work every day, you probably want a screen that is at least 27 inches, preferably two. It should be capable of adjusting its height for better ergonomics.
One of the features they highlighted is is the built in display has very similar specs to their 6K 32" professional display (which, by the way, costs more than this laptop). So when you’re not working at your desk you’ll still have a great display (and why are you buying a laptop unless you occasionally work away from your desk?)
Both have a peak brightness is 1600 nits (a Dell XPS will only do ~600 nits and that’s brighter than most laptops).
Both have 100% P3 color gamut (Dell XPS only gets to 90% - so it just can’t display some standard colors)
even though it’s an LCD, black levels are better than a lot of OLED laptops
contrast is also excellent
120hz refresh rate, which is better than their desktop display (that only runs at 60Hz. Same as the Dell XPS)
245 dpi (again, slightly better than 218 dpi on the desktop display, although you sit further away from a desktop… Dell XPS is 169 dpi)
I love Dell displays, I’ve got two on my desk. But even the Dell displays that cost thousands of dollars are not as good as Apple displays.
The bloatware really isn’t an arguement because it takes all of 30 seconds to uninstall it all with a script that you get off GitHub. Yeah it’s annoying and it shouldn’t be there but it’s not exactly going to alter my purchase decision.
The M1’s ok value for money, but the problem is invariably you’ll want to do more and more complex things over the lifetime of the device, (if only because basic software has become more demanding), while it might be fine at first it tends to get in the way 4 or 5 years down the line. You can pay ever so slightly more money and future proof your device.
But I suppose if you’re buying Apple you’re probably going to buy a new device every year anyway. Never understood the mentality personally.
My cousin gets the new iPhone every single year, and he was up for it at midnight as well, I don’t understand why because it’s not better in any noticeable sense then it was last year, it’s got a good screen and a nice camera but so did the model 3 years ago. Apple customers are just weird.
But I suppose if you’re buying Apple you’re probably going to buy a new device every year anyway. Never understood the mentality personally.
My cousin gets the new iPhone every single year, and he was up for it at midnight as well, I don’t understand why because it’s not better in any noticeable sense then it was last year, it’s got a good screen and a nice camera but so did the model 3 years ago. Apple customers are just weird.
I think you’re basing your general estimation of the Apple customer on the iPhone customer a bit too heavily. E.g., I have never had an iPhone and wouldn’t ever consider buying one, considering how locked down and overpriced it is, and how competitive Android is as an alternative OS.
Meanwhile, I’ve been on MacOS for something like 7 or so years and cannot look back, for everyday computing needs. I have to use Windows occasionally on work machines and I cannot emphasise enough how much of an absolute chore it is. Endless errors, inconsistent UX, slow (even on good hardware), etc. It is by contrast just a painful experience at this point.
And one of the reasons people buy MacBooks, myself included, is to have longevity, not to refresh it after a year (that’s insane). It’s a false economy buying a Windows laptop for most people, because you absolutely do need to upgrade sooner rather than later. My partner has a MacBook bought in 2014 and it still handles everyday tasks very well.
It’s a false economy buying a Windows laptop for most people, because you absolutely do need to upgrade sooner rather than later.
I think you missed my point.
You want to keep laptops for ages regardless of what OS it was it runs (really not sure how that would have any bearing on spec fall off), but the MacBook M1 is only competitive now, but it won’t be competitive in 4 to 5 years. The chip is good for its power consumption but it isn’t a particularly high performance chip in terms of raw numbers. But the laptop costs as if it is a high performance chip.
There’s no such thing as a Windows laptop you just buy a laptop and that’s the specs you get so not quite sure what you’re comparing the MacBook too.
True. Sometimes I look the specs and prices of Apple devices while visiting large electronic stores. I don’t understand how people who aren’t rich can rationalize buying an Apple device. While it’s true that Windows has become increasingly plagued by invasive ads recently, and macOS seems like the only alternative for many, this issue is relatively recent. On the other hand, MacBooks have been overpriced for years.
I bought a PC the other day and it only had 6 gigabytes of RAM which is pathetic for what I paid for it but there you go. The thing is for a fraction of the price Apple are asking to upgrade it to 16, I upgraded it to 32 gig.
I honestly think I could upgrade it to 64 and still come in under the Apple price. They’re charging something like a 300% markup on commercially available RAM, it’s ridiculous.
As usual doing malicious compliance, like when they pretended that iOS and iPadOS were two completely separate operating systems and so iPadOS shouldn’t need to support third party app stores as EU said “iOS”
Probably because there aren’t any, they can’t specifically say “iOS”.
I’m not aware of any other operating system (except the ones in game consoles or dedicated hw) that doesn’t allow the user to install other software not approved by the manufacturer
Actually the more I think about it the more it seems like the only, legally fair decision. Either all of them are demanded to allow alternative app stores or none of them are. Why should the consoles be any different in this regard? 🤔
Also, in 2022, several unidentified developers sued OpenAI and GitHub based on claims that the organizations used publicly posted programming code to train generative models in violation of software licensing terms
They can argue about it not being a copy all they want. If there is a single GPL licenced line of code scraped then anything they produce is a derivative work & must be licenced GPL.
The only way I can see them weaseling out of this is by keeping the program running the model made in-house and proprietary while releasing the model in a format unusable without the base (proprietary) program. But maybe the GPL forbids such obfuscstion efforts (I don’t know, I haven’t studied it in detail)
And if so, I assume “derivative” will still subjective to some degree. Where do we draw the line between derivative and non-derivative?
I’m torn about my personal opinion about copyrights and software licensing in general. I think the main problem is the huge power imbalance between people and corporations, not so much the fact a company analyzed a bunch of available data to solve programming problems.
They don’t copy the data and sell it verbatim to others which would be a legal issue and in my mind also a moral issue, as they don’t add any additional value.
2: Normally derivative works are patched or modified versions of the original. I think the common English meaning would apply & chatGPT et al are fucked. I doubt there is a precedent for this yet.
Is that a developer licence thing? I know GitHub recently announced Windows Arm runners that would be available to non-teams/enterprise tiers later this year.
It isn’t as simple as just compiling. Large programs like games then need to be tested to make sure the code doesn’t have bugs on ARM. Developers often use assembly to optimize performance, so those portions would need to be rewritten as well. And Apple has been the only large install of performant ARM consumer hardware on anything laptop or desktop windows. So, there hasn’t been a strong install base to even encourage many developers to port their stuff to windows on ARM.
Yeah this has been our (well, my) statement on requests to put out ARM binaries for Pulsar. Typically we only put binaries out for systems we actually have within the team so we can test on real hardware and replicate issues. I would be hesitant to put out Windows ARM builds when, as far as I know, we don’t have such a device. If there was a sudden clamouring for it then we could maybe purchase a device out of the funds pot.
The reason I was asking more about if it was to do with developer licences is that we have already dealt with differences between x86 and ARM macOS builds because the former seems to happily run unsigned apps after a few clicks, where the latter makes you run commands in the terminal - not a great user experience.
That is why I was wondering if the ARM builds for Windows required signing else they would just refuse to install on consumer ARM systems at all. The reason we don’t sign at the moment is just because of the exorbitant cost of the certificates - something we would have to re-evaluate if signing became a requirement.
It doesn’t usually work that well in practice. I have been running an M1 MBA for the last couple years (asahi Arch and now Asahi Fedora spin). More complex pieces of software typically have build system and dependencies that are not compatible or just make hunting everything down a hassle.
That said there is a ton of software that is available for arm64 on Linux so it’s really not that bad of an experience. And there are usually alternatives available for software that cannot be found.
I can’t say I’m one who shares that sentiment seeing as the only two projects I’m involved with happen to be Electron based (by chance rather than intention). Hell, one of them is Pulsar which is a continuation of Atom which literally invented Electron.
Until risc-v is at least as performant as top of the line 2 year old hardware it isn’t going to be of interest to most end users. Right now it is mostly hobbyist hardware.
I also think a lot of trust if being put into it that is going to be misplaced. Just because the ISA is open doesn’t mean anything about the developed hardware.
RISC-V is currently already being used in MCUs such as the popular ESP32 line. So I’d say it’s looking pretty good for RISC-V. Instruction sets don’t really matter in the end though, it’s just licensing. It’s not like you’ll be able to make a CPU or even something on the level of old 8-bit MCUs at home any time soon and RISC-V IC designs are typically proprietary too.
RISC-V is currently already being used in MCUs such as the popular ESP32 line. So I’d say it’s looking pretty good for RISC-V. Instruction sets don’t really matter in the end though, it’s just licensing for the producer to deal with. It’s not like you’ll be able to make a CPU or even something on the level of old 8-bit MCUs at home any time soon and RISC-V IC designs are typically proprietary too.
Either way, Trump’s Truth Social woes and finances might be getting a reprieve soon. The SEC approved the deal last month, which could be worth up to $10 billion. Trump, who would hold more than half the shares of the combined company, would reportedly stand to raise his net worth by some $4 billion - more than enough to handle those legal problems without Musk’s help.
Feb 15 (Reuters) - The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission allowed Donald Trump’s media and technology company to merge with a blank-check acquisition vehicle in a deal that currently values the parent of his social media app Truth Social at as much as $10 billion.
So someone is essentially gifting Trump billions for a “merger”.
The thing is even if that were true, which it isn’t, I’d still prefer him with two legs. Especially if I’m paying the amount of money I would normally pay for 50 legs.
I don’t necessarily even begrudge them a profit margin on RAM. Sure it’s kind of a scam but also I guess it’s just the price you pay for convenience. If you want to better price you upgrade the RAM yourself (assuming that was actually possible).
But the markup they have on RAM isn’t reasonable it’s totally insane.
If you went to McDonald’s and cheeseburger was $0.99 and then a cheeseburger with extra cheese was $2 do you think was something was up but that’s essentially what Apple are doing. Cheese does not cost $1.99, you are literally almost doubling the price for a subcomponent
theregister.com
Top