• 0 Posts
  • 238 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 16th, 2023

help-circle
  • Nollij@sopuli.xyztoLinux@lemmy.mlThe Mozilla layoffs ... will get worse
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    8 days ago

    I think you’re massively downplaying how much of a hit this will be.

    Let’s say you make $100k/year. Think about the lifestyle it allows. You’ve just been informed that it’s now going part time, and you’ll only be making $15k/year. How far does that get you?

    Now, you’re expecting someone else to pay for that advertising spot, so it won’t be that bad. But who is even eligible? Microsoft’s Bing is the obvious answer, and probably DDG. The rest of the default search engines aren’t even general web searches.

    Do you really think that either of them are going to pay any significant amount to be the default? Especially when most people are going to change it back to Google anyway, since these are automatically people willing to change to a different browser?

    Sure, they might be willing to pay something. But it won’t be anything close to what they had before.


  • Nollij@sopuli.xyztoPiracy@lemmy.mlAI for torrenting?
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    18 days ago

    You are comparing it to a hash, following some extra rules on what the data could be. You have exactly the length of hash before you can reliably count on duplicates (and collisions happen much sooner). In torrent v1, this is SHA-1, which has a 160-bit (or 20 byte) hash. Which means for every single additional random bit, you have doubled the number of possible matches.

    If your torrent has an uncommonly small chunk size of 256KiB, that’s 261,144 bytes. Minus the 20 from above, and you have a likely 256^261124 chunks that match your hash. That’s a number so large that Google calls it infinity. It would take you forever just to generate these chunks by brute force, since each would need to be created, then hashed, then the results stored somewhere. Many years ago, I remember someone doing this on CRC32 (32 bits/4 bytes) and 6 byte files. It took all night, and produced dozens of hash-matching files. You’re talking many orders of magnitude bigger.

    But then what? You’d still need to apply the other rules on what the data could be. Rules that are probably more CPU-intensive than the hash algorithm.

    The one trick that AI might be able to use to save the day is that it may contain in its corpus the original file. In effect, that would make the AI an unlikely seeder.












  • Jesus the comments are bad…

    You need drivers. Specifically, you need the drivers for your internal disk (probably an NVMe), and/or the USB drivers. You also need to have them in a location where you can reach with Windows Setup. If it’s the USB drivers you need, having them placed loose on the USB install drive won’t help.

    It’s not a laptop thing, nor an Acer thing per se. But it is a hardware thing. Microsoft didn’t include the drivers for your exact chips for whatever reason, probably because they were never submitted for approval.

    In the end, you’ll probably need to mount boot.wim (and likely install.wim) using DISM, add the drivers, then update the USB drive. I don’t think you can do this without a functional Windows machine.

    You might be about to get around some of this by trying different USB ports. Some might have different controllers, and thus need different drivers. This was very common when USB3 was new (e.g. USB2 were Intel and connected to the chipset, while USB3 was an add-on from Marvell and the like)





  • It’s very much the Oracle model.

    A long time ago, Oracle DB could handle workloads much, much larger than any of their competitors. If you needed Oracle, none of the others were even a possibility. There are even tales that it was a point of pride for some execs.

    Then Oracle decided to put the screws to their customers. Since they had no competition, and their customers had deep pockets (otherwise they wouldn’t have had such large databases), they could gouge all they wanted. They even got new customers, because they had no competition.

    Fast forward and there are now a number of meaningful competitors. But it’s not easy to switch to a different DB software, and there are a ton of experienced Oracle devs/DBAs out there. There are very few new projects built using Oracle, but the existing ones will live forever (think COBOL) and keep sucking down licensing fees.

    VMware thinks they are similarly entrenched, and in some cases they’re right. But it’s not the simple hypervisor that everyone is talking about. That can easily be replaced by a dozen alternatives at the next refresh. Instead it’s the extended stack, the APIs and whatnot, that will require significant development work to switch to a new system.