balder1993

That was an interesting read.

Maybe you mean the opposite to wine? The 1st WSL (called V1) was a sort of simulation of the Linux terminal, but wasn’t too compatible. The current version (V2) is a full virtual machine that kind of shares the network and file system automatically, so it can run basically any Linux command line tool.

“Android is open and Google Play is not the only way to get apps”

I feel like Google never completely blocked apk installation on Android so that they can use this argument whenever it is convenient.

Encyclopedia Brittanica wasn’t designed to be addicting and offer misinformation for one.

Huh? It seems to me these are all books about technical skills.

They can’t close the source code as long as they use the Linux kernel, right? Besides, Android is popular among other companies because they can customize part of it as they see fit.

This change isn’t really that drastic, because Android never really followed the open source way of doing things. The article even explains that this won’t change much even for ROM developers, since they’re not creating releases based on “work in progress” branches.

Really the only difference is that Google will spare the work of merging two separate branches often and solving conflicts that might as well be turning into a nightmare as the code base has grown.

The whole point of the GUI is to be more intuitive. If you need to go to the internet to realize how to do the basic stuff, that means your GUI “failed” in its purpose.

That’s still unavoidable for very complex UIs though, but still you measure how good a UI is at helping people accomplish their tasks.

As a company, Microsoft doesn’t reward anyone for improving the performance of the OS. That should be enough of an explanation 😆.

Yes, they made it unrestricted which means they’re charging you considering you can use it a lot. That’s what I mean. Using LLMs APIs isn’t free so it has a cost embedded, which they certainly calculated, or else they’d run the risk of it being abused.

You do not pay anything different for AI prompts. You should really actually try the product before you make up all these things about it.

But what you pay involves the calculated cost of using the AI, otherwise they’d be losing money if a lot of users were to make too many prompts. So it should be possible to have a lower price that didn’t give you any prompts.

I wish there was a cheaper plan that didn’t involve AI at all. Like, I don’t care to have X prompts every month. I’d like to pay just for the engine.

This is a troll’s or a teenager’s line of thinking.

Kinda reminded me back in college I had a friend who I’d describe as a genius in computer science and programming. I was always so jealous how he was so knowledgeable about everything teachers talked about to the point of correcting them sometimes (and hurting the ego of some of them, which isn’t very smart).

He was like a C++ nuts to the point of having some of his code on the Boost library (which was impressive for a 20yo), but when Rust started getting popular back then, he really got into it and quickly became an “evangelist”. For some years, everything was about Rust, if you stopped to talk to him.

I met him year later and asked if he was still working with Rust, and he said after using it for enough different use-cases, he actually started to dislike it and pointed out a lot of problems and flaws that I wouldn’t possibly remember. I think he also said the community was very toxic and was taking the language to a direction he didn’t like. I suspect nowadays he is just another fella using Lua and C++ for his personal projects.