The direct numerics of moors law may not be definite.

But the principal it defines is. In the future computers will have much more power then they do now.

The reason modern GPUs use things like shaders etc is to allow them to archive massive manipulation of data in more efficient ways specific for the task desired.

Honestly this is why I mention time scale as the main thing that will make this possible. How modern gpus or other specialised processers do the task is less important then what the game code is asking the gpu to achieve.

The idea that at a unknown future date. The CPU GPUs or what ever future tech we have. will never be able to run fast enough to read current cpu or gpu instruction sets. And generate the effect defined using future techniques is not viable as an argument. The only questions are how long and is anyone going to have the motivation to reverse engineer the large but finite instruction sets used by secretive hardware corps today.

Not so sure about that. When you consider time spans.

Currently we can emulate the majority of early games consoles. So theoretically with time and Moors law any hardware will be emulate able in a few decades. With enough information.

The advantage of open source software. Is it can be used with the original binaries to reverse engineer the instruction set even if the original manufacturer wishes to hide it. So with will and effort even the most complex hardware will be able to be emulated on future much faster hardware.

True.

At least in poverty stricken nations. Oh and the US. But most of the rest of the world is a little different.

Sure in the early days of developments wealth helps in all nations. But it just tends to be a matter of time before new medical tech makes it to all the population in most 1st world nations.

The US is really pretty unique being one of the wealthiest nations but not having universal health care.

Blasphemy quick stone the unbelievers.

Kidding of course. Have to admit I agree. I’ve used Linux since the late 1990s. So long long before it was usable by most folks standards.

I started because my university had HPUX machines that we needed to submit work on. So wanted a unix like enviroment at home I could work on. This was a tim when linux was basically slackers on 50plus floppy disks. Xwindows needed configuring for every monitor. Honestly by current standards usability was non existant compared to windows.

But honestly I spent so much time on the system. And watched it improve. To the point I find windows an utter pain in the arse now. And will avoid it under all circumstances.

But the idea of convincing folks who have no interest. Where the hell do folks find the time.

Honestly what we have now is AI. As in it is not intelligent just trys to mimic it.

Digital Intelegence if we ever achive it would be a more accurate name.

Dammed impressive. How evil AI is managing to post defending itself.

I for one will be happy to bow to our new AI overlord.

I sorta agree.

Unfortunately modern science is slow to change ideas it has accepted in the past.

Neil Degrass Tyson did an interesting talk on the % of religion in science. Based in the US. And it basically indicated that the higher you get. The lower the odds you belie in religiose ideals.

But the levels were pretty high until the top. And still not 0 then.

I personally think (opinion not fact) this has left us with a community. That hesitates to challenge science on religion alone. IE we don’t see ideas thrown out when it is clear religion was involved in forming them. But instead only when clear evidence refutes them.

In my less the humble opinion. This leaves science with a few old wives nuns tails. That are still followed 400years after the 1689 acceptance of the scientific method.

Honestly Humanity has been pretty arrogant. Took 100s of years before we recognised birds use tools. Mainly because everytime it was seen. Some other excuse was seen for why the bird was sticking a stick into a tree. Science was so sure mankind was unique it was unwilling to see reality.

But honestly if you think that is bad. Do some research into why European explorers thought Europe represented the most advanced civilisation. African cities raised to the ground rather then face the idea they may have been their before us.

More worried by the sci fi like future.

Where this stuff evolves into something that looks to hunt mankind. Due to the micro plastics we all have in our bodies.

Huge black fungus blobs rolling up the beach. Covering sun bathers and slowly absorbing the living body over decades.

Thanks ill lookninto that sometime soon.

Not OP. But curios on the subject. I use debian bookworm with an older Nvidia 1050.

I currently tend to use gnome. As I have multi res monitors. Mainly due to vision issues. 2x32inch 2k 1x28inch 4k and a 24inch 1k

Dose any desktop allow stable fractional scaling for each monitor independently. Its been a good few years since I looked into it. But in the past it was unstable.

As gnome shell and ubuntu. Have nio such good faith agreement.

And thisbis just a process ubuntu has to reduce its own work load.

Who really cares. Ubuntu can include and reject any software they choose.

Ubuntu users can also add and take what ever risks they choose.

And gnomeshell can choose to change there releases and software as they choose.

This os the cost of free as in speach software. If you are need 3rd parties to make your software work. You have to accept they have the same freedoms you insist on.

Personally i prefer that and the option to use older versions if thing go wrong. Then a privrate for profit ccompany making the same choices with less freedom for me.

You can. Most things have gui options.

But you quickly learn for somethings. The terminal is just easier.

If you ignore odd stuff. Most everyday stuff to maintain the system is available in a controlled panal like program. It varies based on distribution and windows manager. But the basic setup is there for most things.

Its when you want to do something creative it gets more complex. While most commands have gui apps. Most online guidance will just find the terminal an easy way to guide you.

It could be inherited from a common ancestor.

Or it could just have likely evolved multiple times in different primate branches.

As we have absolutely no way to document how early it first happened in our own branch. To assume it is linked is just more attempts to try and indicate the human branch is special. Use of tools has been seen in many many branches. We don’t assume that came from a joint ancestor that crawled out of the water. Or before.

You can copy binary code. Just as easy as source code.

It is only when running on a different architecture it gets a bit more complex.

And give the binary is directly translatable by software. Not hugely more complex for any company of the size you are unwilling to fight in court over open source code.

Sorry but no you are wrong. Hading the source in no way makes code harder to copy. Its how most of us hacked into games in the 1990s.

After all binary code is just simpler instruction set that takes very very minimal effort to convert into assembly language. And can be read by many even without that effort.

Its hardly a secret encrypted format. (Unless you are also designing your own hardware and not letting anyone see that. )

Is it anymore the case with other licences though.

Obscurity is no security at all. If you have no ability to fight to keep tour copy right or patient. People will copy it open or closed.

Even direct machine code can be copied a reverse engineered fairly simply.

So non of this is purely a open source permissive licence issue. Its a big corperations acting like fudal lords issue.

Sorta why the FSF was formed.

Because thses lucences working effects folks other then yourself.

So best for all OS developers and users to work together.

So OP needs to poop in area perfect for breeding bacteria?

Darn parliment can finally be usefull.

Of course based on that definition. Fiat currency is the same. Just without the complex number.

I am really not a huge fan of crypto. But honestly all modern (post gold standard) money. Is entirly based on users confidence in the nations backing it. The proof of work used for bit coin. Really is no more a matter of faith in folks dumb enough to buy it from you later.

Depends what nation you are in and how you obtained it.

Anyone can release software under any licence. As long as they are not breaking the licence they release under. Or the licence they use any 3rd party code is under

I do not think GPL has any rules about claims. Just actual actions. But if they released in under another licence. Then it is possible. (But unlikely). The licence has such rules.

So in most cases. Actual actions or lack of rather then claims. Based on the licence is your only option. And that would mean contact he authors of any included code. Or FSF etc.

Some nations have advertising rules. Depending on how and where it was obtained you may be able to contact their advertising standards association equiv.

But providng for free can often weaken this. Although it is likely far from an absolute excuse to false advertising.