• gandalf_der_12te@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    edit-2
    15 hours ago

    Our hardware has its own problems.

    We rely way too much on x86 and ia64 architecture, both of which have only two big manufacturers in the world. That’s not good because it’s almost monopolies.

    It would be better to have simpler chipsets that can be produced by more manufacturers worldwide, and especially ones that can be produced by smaller regional manufacturers.

    On top of that we shouldn’t distribute compiled binaries for the x86 and ia64 chipsets; instead program code should be distributed like .wasm, in a hardware-independent way, and compiled on the target device. That would enable that hardware can use any chipset it wants and there are no software incompatibilities because of it.

    • certified_expert@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      2 hours ago

      RISC-V

      • royalty free
      • future-proof
      • extensible
      • base ISA is 40 instructions!
      • beautifully documented
      • can perform in a range of situations, from embedded to many-cores servers!
      • can handle petabytes of memory (the higher schemes)
      • no nonsense historic compatibility drag.
    • melfie@lemy.lol
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      9 hours ago

      I have been waiting impatiently for WASM to really take off. I’d imagine that some day, it will be the most popular way to build software.

    • nyan@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 hours ago

      On top of that we shouldn’t distribute compiled binaries for the x86 and ia64 chipsets; instead program code should be distributed like .wasm, in a hardware-independent way, and compiled on the target device. That would enable that hardware can use any chipset it wants and there are no software incompatibilities because of it.

      You’re describing Gentoo Linux . . . which is not especially popular among Linux distributions even though it runs on just about anything. There may be a reason for that.

      • krooklochurm@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        9 hours ago

        Well, they’re talking about something lower level than the operating system. For one.

        Secondly, every distro is inferior to the only perfect thing mankind has ever created: Hannah Montana Linux. If you’re using anything else you may as well just break your computer and drink cyanide.

    • Alphane Moon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      How is performance though?

      And honestly ARM isn’t that much than x86 in terms of freedom and competition.

      • wewbull@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        edit-2
        13 hours ago

        My thoughts are “Why do they need one?”. It’s not like UEFI stops you doing anything.

        UBIOS’s unique features over UEFI include increased support for chiplets and other heterogeneous computing use-cases, such as multi-CPU motherboards with mismatching CPUs, something UEFI struggles with or does not support. It will also better support non-x86 CPU architectures such as ARM, RISC-V, and LoongArch, the first major Chinese operating system.

        [citation needed]

        I would say this is about increasing the level of control of the platform, not about technological issues.

        Edit: For example, here’s the RISC-V UEFI specification.

        • HertzDentalBar@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          It’s about having a home grown option. Can’t trust Americans not to backdoor everything, and that generally conflicts with China’s desire to backdoor everything.

        • CosmoNova@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          10 hours ago

          Control is the most important thing to the CCP so it makes complete sense from their perspective. We would be free to buy into it but they would definitely force it on devices within China.

  • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    83
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Does that mean I will have more choice in which surveillance agency I want to be spied by?