For me it's been the year of the Linux desktop for about 30 years now. Shrug. Been on KDE Plasma 6 for the last two years and it works for me. I use Mate Desktop on my laptop and it's fine. Never bothered to learn Gnome 3 so I can't comment on it, other than to say I really hate client-side decorations and controls in the area where the window titlebar should be. I guess that's also why I don't use macOS or Windows anymore either.

Back in 1998 I first tried Linux on my PC and tried the various desktop environments of the day including FVWM95, and they all sucked really, and my terminal foo wasn't so good back then. KDE 1.1 was what made Linux finally work for me as my primary OS. I could finally ditch Windows 95. I wasn't too thrilled about the single click thing but it didn't take too long for KDE to introduce optional double clicking. The other killer app on Linux for me at the time was the KDevelop IDE. It gave me a real path from VS on Windows 2000 to using Linux for all my development. I no longer use KDevelop, but I still use kdbg from time to time.

My uni's CS department had a bunch of Solaris labs running on x86 hardware, and CDE. I found a bunch of KDE binary tarballs for Solaris and ran it from my home directory and it was really nice. Other students saw that and started running it too. Eventually the Sysadmins installed it for everyone. I think it really did change how students looked at Unix. Later on as a sysadmin myself I oversaw the complete replacement of HPUX and Solaris with Linux, and we gave students their choice of Gnome 2 or KDE. Both were well liked by the students.

Feeling old is exactly the point. My Linux desktop, whether it's Mate, Cinnamon, or KDE, is always configured to look and act exactly the same as it has for the last 30 years. I figure a successful major distro update is successful if the final result looks exactly the same as before the update.

I've been running Gnome 2 for decades now. The Mate Desktop is the direct descendant of Gnome 2. All the major distros have Mate spins of it. I happen to like Mate better than Cinnamon.

But I know run KDE Plasma and have it set up to look just as my Linux desktop has looked for 25 years.

Circle has stalled/died. It was originally a proof of concept of "Safe C++" which was proposed to the C++ standards committee. However they decided to go for "Profiles" instead. So Circle hasn't seen any development since then. Hopefully someone will pick it up. It's a good concept, and in my mind where C++ should have gone.

The problem is AI has lost all meaning as a term these days. If the article means that they are going to apply in advance neural network machine learning algorithm to air traffic control patterns then yes I can believe it would work. On the other hand if they mean that some llm is just going to be plugged in with agents to control aircraft movements then yes I agree it's crazy and going to result in human deaths and destruction.

Not quite. The safe c library is primarily about runtime memory safety checks which are a good thing. But rust is also about compile time enforcement of memory safety. This is not something you can get from a library for an existing language like C. That's not to say you couldn't make a C dialect that had rust-like guarantees.

No, strange glitch on my end... I swear your original post used "sill working" and I couldn't for the life of me figure out what you meant. No trace of that now so I can't explain where that came from!

Considering Fedora on an LTS server is an interesting choice, to say the least.

While I think replacing coreutils with uutils is pointless and a waste of precious resources, I don't think it would influence my choice of server distros. Especially if it's 99% compatible I doubt you'd ever know if you hadn't read this slashdot article.

No I don't believe it ever did. The POSIX standard defined the behavior of > to truncate immediately decades ago, for particular reasons including proper error handling. I can find no evidence it was ever like that before on Linux. Maybe you used a shell that was not POSIX compatible.

And besides all that, it has nothing to do with coreutils or their rust equivalent. It's a shell-enforced thing.

Certainly AI is a powerful tool for the CCP to continue to control what people think and how they think. This is no doubt why the CCP is encouraging an increase in AI development under their control. It's a seductively powerful tool. For the good of the people of course. Honestly makes me wonder if some of Trump's inner circle are thinking the same thing, although their actions in the Trump Iran war suggest they might not.

Timothy Zahn wrote some very thought-provoking and disturbing words about this years ago (despite the em dashes it is not AI-generated!):

"What sort of power?"

For the first time since landing, Thrawn seemed taken aback. "The conquering of worlds, of course. The final defeat of the Rebellion. The reestablishment of the glory that was once the Empire's New Order."

C'baoth shook his head. "You don't understand power, Grand Admiral Thrawn. Conquering worlds you'll never even visit again isn't power. Neither is destroying ships and people and rebellions you haven't looked at face-to-face." He waved his hands in a sweeping gesture around him, his eyes glittering with an eerie fire. "This, Grand Admiral Thrawn, is power. This city---this planet---these people. Every human, Psa-dan, and Myneyrsh who live here are mine. Mine."

And then later:

"I told him at the very beginning that true power didn't lie in the conquering of distant worlds. Or in battles and war and the crushing of faceless rebellions."

He smiled, his eyes glittering brightly in Covell's mind. "No, General Covell," he said softly. "This---this---is true power. Holding another's life in the palm of your hand. Having the power to choose his path, and his thoughts, and his feelings. To rule his life, and decree his death."

Unfortunately auto correct sabotaged your original post. Until this post I was wondering what you meant by "sill working."

I've never heard of anyone extracting a key from a TPM chip, and no doubt Apple will be using a similar mechanism. This is pretty secure that way. The problem I have with it is it places verification in the hands of one company, Apple. And it requires a whole certificate infrastructure, similar to what SSL has. We'll have to have public lists of signed keys for verification, revocation lists, etc. If every camera maker adopts a similar system, will we have one big compatible system (sort of like SSL), or will it be lots of silos?

But yeah you're right about taking a picture of the screen or whatever.

Indeed. I say bring in the Chinese EVs at a 50% tariff rate. They will still be reasonably priced, but hopefully will grant domestic[1] auto makers a chance to change their ways.

[1] by that I mean American. Here in Canada we may make cars, but all factories are owned by and work for American companies. There is no Canadian auto sector in truth.

It's always been about American dominance at any cost, including doing exactly what China does. Sounds like they've learned from the best! The US can scream all they want about others playing fair when they have never been fair themselves. This whole idea the world economy is a zero sum game is highly detrimental to everyone.