Readit Newscost is not the priority with AWS. To quote my collaborator, "I just scaled up to 600 PB for our event"
When I think AWS I think speed, scale-up, scale-out, capacity & dynamic flexibility are more key.
AWS is not the "cheapo commodity option", nor is Azure
Developer frustrated with missing functionality / UI problems / etc / and solves it. So awesome!
22%. But operations also includes civilian salaries and procurement naturally includes the labor required to produce what was procured. I would assume that R&D also includes research grants and salaries.
Based on their omission I assume you're computing these numbers with them split out but it hardly seems fair to say you're spending "900" on defense when the total cost of paying that "900" is going to be much more since you had to borrow.
It's like saying a house only costs 1M when you end up paying over 1M in interest as well as the principal for 2M.
Net_Interest $965 billion, 13.3%
Ask them to swap their standard of living with that of someone living without the influence of empire and you'll get nothing but hard stares.
(based on FY 2025 budget proposal )
category, billions, % of federal spending
Social Security 1,543 21.2%
Medicare 936 12.9%
Medicaid 589 8.1%
Food Stamps (SNAP) 94 1.3%
WIC 8 0.1%
Section 8 33 0.5%
Defense 900 12.4%
Other Entitlement Programs 1,168 16.1%
Other Agencies (Non-Defense Discretionary) 1,029 14.2%
https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2024/02/01/the-u-s-mili...
Hackerdom has always had a relationship with Defense, Intelligence & LE.
Most hackers are deeply benevolent and care greatly about the world, and insecurity at large, mostly fostered by Business.
Building relationships with defense & intel are often the best avenues towards moving towards a more secure future, working within the system for positive change. Our way of life, and our freedoms are not secure with imminent threats on the horizon.
Please, disabuse yourself of the notion that Mainland China is not weaponizing their hackerdom against us simultaneously.
Temporally, because (knock on wood) RISC-V is going to take over the RadHard space market between Microchip/NASA’s High Performance Space Computer [1] and the Gaisler chips [2]
In a non-proprietary sense because much NVDA is alleged to be RISC-V
[1] https://www.microchip.com/en-us/products/microprocessors/64-...
[2] https://www.gaisler.com/secondary-product-category/rad-hard-... see GR765 & GR801
That's getting you twice the RAM for the same price. Now the Framework has both intangible cool factor and scope for more upgrades, so if money is no object, get the Framework.
But I can vouch for the EVO-X2 as the real Strix Halo experience: its thermals are solid, and even under sustained 100W+ its quieter than the average gaming PC. Obviously an elite ITX build can do better, but it's jaw-dropping at the price point: great ports, plenty of M.2 capacity, stable under extreme load, and a lot cheaper.
Well played sir! <3
Out of those three projects, two are notoriously under-resourced, and one is notorious for constantly ramming through new features at a pace the other two projects can't or won't keep up with.
Why wouldn't the overworked/underresourced Safari and Firefox people want an excuse to have less work to do?
This appeal to authority doesn't hold water for me because the important question is not 'do people with specific priorities think this is a good idea' but instead 'will this idea negatively impact the web platform and its billions of users'. Out of those billions of users it's quite possible a sizable number of them rely on XSLT, and in my reading around this issue I haven't seen concrete data supporting that nobody uses XSLT. If nobody really used it there wouldn't be a need for that polyfill.
Fundamentally the question that should be asked here is: Billions of people use the web every day, which means they're relying on technologies like HTML, CSS, XML, XSLT, etc. Are we okay with breaking something that 0.1% of users rely on? If we are, okay, but who's going to tell that 0.1% of a billion people that they don't matter?
The argument I've seen made is that Google doesn't have the resources (somehow) to maintain XSLT support. One of the googlers argued that new emerging web APIs are more popular, and thus more deserving of resources. So what we've created is a zero-sum game where any new feature added to the platform requires the removal of an existing feature. Where does that game end? Will we eventually remove ARIA and/or screen reader support because it's not used by enough people?
I think all three browser vendors have a duty to their users to support them to the best of their ability, and Google has the financial and human resources to support users of XSLT and is choosing not to.
Is there a spending on junk projects issue with Firefox?
https://galaxy.ai/youtube-summarizer/is-mozilla-wasting-mone...