It's called tivoization and started with a device called "Tivo" which was the first of its kind to attempt this procedure.
There are probably lots of hardware devices in your house that use GPL software but prevent you from actually modifying it because the hardware will refuse to run modified copies. If a piece of software is licensed GPLv3, it would violate the license terms to do something like this.
This has to be the most pathetic thing I've ever read. A CEO just asking people to stop saying mean things about the garbage he's pushing out.
It's just so pathetic. I'd be embarrassed if I were affiliated with his company in any way.
That's certainly one possibility. But another possibility is that the people praise LLMs are not very good at judging whether the code it generates is of good quality or not....
Agreed. To make it a bit more general, whenever I see people claiming to be able to predict the future with absolute certainty and confidence, that to me is just a sign they are idiots and shouldn't be listened to. Definitely had a lot of those in past companies I have worked in. A lot of the time, they're trying to gaslight people into believing in their version of the future so they can sell us garbage (products, stock price, etc.). They'll always get some fools to believe them of course.
The number-one frustration, cited by 45% of respondents, is dealing with "AI solutions that are almost right, but not quite," which often makes debugging more time-consuming. In fact, 66% of developers say they are spending more time fixing "almost-right" AI-generated code.
Not surprising at all. When you write code, you're actually thinking about it. And that's valuable context when you're debugging. When you just blindly follow snippets you got from some random other place, you're not thinking about it and you don't have that context.
So it's easy to see how this could lead to a net productivity loss. Spend more time writing it yourself and less time debugging, or let something else write it for you quickly, but spend a lot of time debugging. And on top of it all, no consideration of edge cases and valuable design requirement context can also get lost too.
I'm a slow adopter of new technologies like ~~AI~~ LLMs. My reasoning is that if it turns out to actually be a good product, then it will eventually prove itself, and the early adopters can be the "beta testers" so to speak. But if it turns out to be a bad product, then I won't have wasted my time on something that isn't worthwhile.
Maybe a day comes when I start using these tools, but they clearly just aren't all that useful in their current form. In all honesty, I'm pretty sure that they will never be useful enough for me to consider them worth learning, but definitely not so today.
Cupertino has complied anyway, and said it introduced “Notarization for iOS apps, an authorization process for app marketplaces, and requirements that help protect children from inappropriate content and scams.”
Notarization requirements mean that they still maintain total control over the operating system and what software it can run. These kinds of onerous requirements keep the bar artificially high for competitors and are only possible because they are still enforcing their monopolistic control over the platform.
So no, they're not complying at all actually. They're just doing the same thing in a different way.
I don't think so. These AI stunts are all coming from a small group of Silicon Valley investors. They only want to focus on software that's widely used, so web browsers are a natural target. Mail clients aren't that popular anymore, so I doubt they'll advocate for fucking them up.
The last Windows OS I used was XP, around 2004-ish. Even back then, it was obvious to me that, because it was closed source, that they could one day start acting against my interests, and there was nothing I could do to stop it. I saw open source as an insurance policy - it prevents vendors from acting maliciously against their users. In that very quaint, old time, nobody believed that MS would ever do something like that, but it didn't matter - the fact was that they could, so inevitably, they would.
I'm quite proud of how prescient I was when I look at what they're doing today. No evil is too great to stop a greedy businessman.
Anyway, I decided to just be brave and create a partition on my main drive and install Ubuntu on it. All I needed to get my work done was OpenOffice, LaTeX, a browser, a compiler, Python.... Everything worked better in Linux than Windows so even though I was dual-booting, I practically never used Windows again after a couple weeks. Later on, I switched to Debian, and the next laptop that I bought, I just wiped the hard disk and used Linux for the whole thing. I kept the recovery partition because I was paranoid but obviously never needed it.
Today, there's no doubt in my mind that Linux is the best OS. Sure, Macs have better batteries, but if I'm doing productive work, then I don't really need more than an hour away from my charger. I could maybe agree that the BSDs are better, but I've never tried them.
Agreed, and it feels like a waste of so much great potential when you consider the fantastic development they poured into it. Such a shame.
I've only used Github Actions on one project, but I found it to be terribly overengineered and overly complex. I think that's more the fault of the team than anything else, but hey, Github is run by Microsoft, so I'm pretty sure they deserve some of the blame too.
If you're self-hosting, I've found Jenkins to be pretty nice. Of course, forgejo has its own offerings as well.
I thought they renamed their entire product line to "Copilot" by now, didn't they?
Uninstalling it at this point would leave absolutely nothing left!