Did the citizens of that country take the loan? No

Did they benefit at all from the loan? No

Did the world bank make any effort to ensure the above were answered ‘yes’? No

When you make a leveraged loan are you supposed to be guaranteed that the it was risk free? No

If leveraged loans could be made risk-free ‘breal your legs’ style the way the world bank does to countries, banks would be offering loans to every punter who wanted to bet on the dogs.

Just finished my third co-op campaign with my partner, I think she may enjoy the game more than I do. It is pretty great having shared hobbies ☺️

While I do agree these people exist, most people are some mixture of benefiting from, and being harmed by the status quo. To erode support for a mode of production takes both fighting those who are directly against your class interests, and convincing the majority of people that their class interests align with your actions. Often those who feel the most precarity under the current system are it’s most ardent defenders, simply because their afraid of loosing what little status they have eked out for themselves.

Corbyn was sabotaged both by people who rightly saw him as a threat, and by those who didn’t see the benefit he could bring them.

Perhaps it could be useful for longer journeys, or for those with a physical disability?

Either way, it’s definitely not a revolutionary concept.

Not everything has to be “the replacement for cars”. I hope diversification is the “death by a thousand cuts” to cars, where everyone has an option that best accommodates their situation.

A mixed system which starts with changing the most socially egregious examples is probably the only politically viable transition; lots of people fear disruption, and it takes time and proving to them that the changes are beneficial.

I’d suggest beginning with something like Corbyn’s Labor had proposed; if a capitalist business is sold or fails, the workers are given first right of refusal and a govt loan is given for them to purchase as a worker cooperative.

If it’s a G502/702, they’ve got a very fucky scroll wheel & middle click; it’s actually a lemon, but since nothing else works with the wireless pads they’re the only options.

deleted by creator

Kernel modules don’t have to be open source provided they follow certain rules like not using gpl only symbols. This is the same reason you can use an NVIDIA driver.

Its not enforced so much by law as what the fsf and Linux foundation can prove and are willing to pursue; going after a company that size is expensive, especially when they’re a Linux foundation partner. A lot of major Linux foundation partners are actively breaking the GPL.

Both Intel and AMD invest a lot into open source drivers, firmware and userspace applications, but also due to the nature of X86_64’s UEFI, a lot of the proprietary crap is loaded in ROM on the motherboard, and as microcode.

I work with SoC suppliers, including Qualcomm and can confirm; you need to sign an NDA to get a highly patched old orphaned kernel, often with drivers that are provided only as precompiled binaries, preventing you updating the kernel yourself.

If you want that source code, you need to also pay a lot of money yearly to be a Qualcomm partner and even then you still might not have access to the sources for all the binaries you use. Even when you do get the sources, don’t expect them to be updated for new kernel compatibility; you’ve gotta do that yourself.

Many other manufacturers do this as well, but few are as bad. The environment is getting better, but it seems to be a feature that many large manufacturers feel they can live without.

I actually found the opposite with my steam library; on ZFS with ZSTD I only saw a ratio of 1.1 for steamapps, not that there’s really any meaningful performance penalty for compressing it.

I’m sure the developers are competent, but the reason I care about the design decisions is the same reason the electric brakes on cars don’t interface with its infotainment system; the interface inherently creates opportunities for out of spec behaviour and even if the introduced risk is tiny, the consequence is so bad that it’s worth avoiding.

If you have to have an airbag be controlled by software (ideally the mechanism is physical, like a pull tab), it should be an isolated real time device with monitoring your accelerometer and triggering the airbag be it’s only jobs. If it’s also waiting to hear back from another device about whether your subscription ran out before it starts checking, the risk of failure also has to consider that triggering device.

It can be done perfectly, but it’s software so of course it has bugs.

That information changes none of my issues; if you don’t see the plethora of potential implementation bugs involved, either you don’t code professionally or you shouldn’t be.

Yes, but also from an implementation perspective: if I’m making code that might kill somebody if it fails, I want it to be as deterministic and simple as possible. Under no circumstances do I want it:

1. checking an external authentication service.
2. connected to the internet in any way.
3. have multiple services which interact over an API. Hell, even FFIs would be in the “only if I have to” bucket.