dmitrygr

You might be thinking of win9x. Win2k had no flaws and was perfect in all ways. I will not be taking questions.

What worthy features have they added since win2k that justify the 7.75 GB more RAM being needed?

Basically it boils down to “trust us, we won’t do what this guy is warning you we might do”

Forgive me, but that’s not convincing. The post even admits that it is entirely possible to do it. It just says that it will “antithetical“. Many antithetical things have been done in the past. It won’t be the first.

> Germany and France could impose their will on smaller neighbors

and do...

For example Hungary is being fined daily for attempting self-determination https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/clww729180po

It is hilarious that you think they WANT to be fined.

Those with power setting the rules is the way the world worked long before America. It never changed nor could it, as anyone with power would eventually tire of being told how to live

Nothing to do with America. This is how the world works.

> If not, then you'd need to organize a referendum and let the population itself decide on a one person, one vote basis.

Our founders smartly chose against direct democracy. The more I look around, the more right I see they were.

Rules apply to those on whom they are enforced by those who can enforce. News at 11.

> These nations chose to for it to have authority over them.

Refresh my memory, what did USA choose about that?

“Annualized revenues” is the same as “oh you got married? At this rate by next year you’ll have 500 husbands”

https://m.xkcd.com/605/

There is a reason we consider annual results. A year is a natural complete cycle. There isn’t equal amount of demand in January as in June for almost any product.

So taking one good week and multiplying it by 52 (or 4 x 13 as the case may be) is at least naïve and realistically — deceptive.

plus row and column decoders that get more and more complex with size. but consider the size of the weights. convert to mm^2. Gawk at the resulting value

Qwen 3.6-27B is 56 GB of weights. Let's round to 550Gbit. NOBODY makes huge ROMs in modern SoCs, but if we assume it is as dense as the densest TSMC N3 SRAM, this is 33.5 Mbit/mm^2

Then your weights are 16,400 mm^2 !!! The maximum reticle-size N3 die is ~800 mm^2 so you cannot make it.

But, you might say, SRAM is 6 transistors. ROM might be just one. So 1/6 of that... 2730 mm^2... which is still too big to manufacture.

Seeing the usual 30

In addition to some of the other replies you got, here is one more:

Much of a model are weights, and high-density ROMs are very very very hard.

I would be curious if this happens, what their demands would be, and under what authority

So: replace what should be a clear simple concise program using documented API that can be understood and debugged and improved … with an interface designed for completely different purposes, gaining absolutely nothing, losing debuggability, clarity, and extensibility. Yeah…

I suppose this article could be salvaged if it ended with something like “We get that this is an incredibly dumb idea, we’re just doing it for the lols. Please, nobody attempt something like this seriously, or in any production system. For educational purposes only.” But there isn’t any of that there.

Just wow.

You wonder why I wouldn’t want unelected bureaucrats deciding my fate? I guess you never lived in USSR. The question is hilariously naïve.

Luckily my country is not a party. I don’t want my government (that I elect) outsourcing any decision-making power to a body I do not elect (ICC). As a voter this is a hard NO for me.

> Regardless of what one personally thinks about the ICC, this isn’t a good look

Legitimate question. Why should a third party (whom I do not respect)’s opinion of me matter to me? Do you care what my cat thinks about you?

> In other words, hash collision attacks are maybe the dumbest possible way to get untrusted code on a system when unpaid open source maintainers and low-trust package management forges exist.

Yes. And we literally see this every other month with NPM

Ok then. Soviet Union had free speech too. Nobody got arrested for criticizing Reagan or Churchill.

Clearly the point is clear. Why nitpick pointlessly?

> news about the UK it might looks like a dystopian surveillance state where you get arrested for criticising

Might it "seem" that way because it is that way?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/steveforbes/2025/09/09/people-a...

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/08/22/britain-has-beco...

https://freespeechunion.org/news/more-than-62-000-people-hav...

Oh, and your government itself openly states it on record, too: https://hansard.parliament.uk/lords/2025-07-17/debates/F807C...

My math teacher used to say that “obviously” means “I don’t know how to prove” and “trivially” means “tenuously at best”. Thanks for the demo of this in action.

It’s been a thing since 1789: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_search_exception

> Had I done it manually, there's also no way to prove I created it without LLM help

Of course there is -- ask you about it.

The coolest interview process i ever participated in (at MIT Lincoln Lab) was structured this way, and seems 100% LLM-proof. The interview was: give a talk about a cool/impressive technical thing you did for an hour and then answer questions from the interviewers about it for an hour. No way to succeed there without actually understanding.

And this is why when Pixel phones started promising 7 years of support, everyone with a brain said “uh huh, suuuure” and kept buying iPhones which DO deliver that.

What you seek is CHAR_BIT

> Even the EU is a lot of different countries. Some of them quite poor, and some of them wealthier also with high GDP per capita.

All poorer than Mississippi per-capita

Your unnecessary strawmanning was correctly predicted by the author.

> Because this isn’t my first rodeo, I can already foresee the criticism of this article: people are going to focus on my persona and my tone, not on what matters: GNOME‘s shitty practice.

And he was right. If I am giving you free fixes for your very real documented bugs, take them. You can hate me for it later, privately. At least that is what happens if you care about your users more than about your ego.

Sadly, this sane behavior is rare. And this is why the year of the Linux desktop will never happen.

Now this is HACKER news! Kudos to the author! Well done.

The NOP thing was predictable. Qemu is not great at limiting itself to actual requested emulated hardware, often allowing supersets of instruction sets and abilities.

And NAND....is always unnecessarily exciting.

That is not a quote of anything I said. My original comment had not been edited. If you choose to convert my statements to strange exaggerated strawmen, do so without a quote implication please.

> Because this isn’t my first rodeo, I can already foresee the criticism of this article: people are going to focus on my persona and my tone, not on what matters: GNOME‘s shitty practices.

> Let’s make one thing clear: even if Satan was the one providing a patch, if the patch is valid and fixes a real issue, you apply the patch, period. Why? Because that’s what is best for the users.

Amen