It just turns the motion into fades of equal duration. Reason 352811 I will never own an iPhone.

>We're choosing a license that is usable by the entire community.

What a weaselly way to put it.

A GPL library, as I'm sure you know, is perfectly usable by anyone including jujutsu and anyone else. They just have to also license under the GPL and this is no barrier to open source projects.

I love how he uses the word "community", effectively washing away what is really happening which is taking a community protected asset and turning it into a corporate one.

Ok, my coffee just kicked in and I'm incensed. Might go do an FSF donation.

Shared libraries (and mmapped files in general) are deduplicated; it's nowhere near as bad as you think. The kernel loads a .so into memory once and then maps that memory into every process that mmaps it.

Editing to add: this deduplication is one of the greatest upsides to dynamic linking. Common libs like libgcc and libc only have to exist in memory once and can stay in CPU caches, whereas if they were statically linked into every binary, each binary would have a copy of that library that wouldn't be shared with anything else and you'd waste a lot of memory.

Doesn't the loaded code have to be patched for relocations?

It does, so not 100% is reused. The patched parts are in different sections though, so the entire .text (code) section ends up being reused.

Not on modern archs that provide decent support for PIE (position independent executables).

How do you think position independent code can call functions from other .so's without being patched with their addresses?

They can't, so even PIC code still has to have a relocation table that gets patched. It's in a different page than the code though, so code does still get reused.

That's not really patching though, any more than any use of function pointers is patching.

There's a part of the .so ELF file (the Global Offset Table aka GOT) that has to be modified with all the addresses of the functions being imported, which of course vary from process to process.

If not patching, what exactly would you call modifying part of the file?

And the got is just a big table of pointers like any other table of pointers your application manipulates as it runs.

This isn't meant as a reductive take, but instead that there is a difference between completely describable in C like the contents of the .got section, and something like a .reloc section that actually has to understand the generated assembly in order to build the relocation table to load and link the executable. Both are linking, but I've saved "patching" for more brain surgery esque techniques. Like on mips, the jump instruction immediate is the bottom 26 bits of the absolute address of the target, so you're going through and modifying all of the jump instructions if you load it to somewhere it wasn't linked at.

Not if it's position-independent.

Mostly off topic, but why is the spec for JPEG and JPEG XL paywalled? I wouldn't call them open standards if they're not available free-of-charge to the public.

It's a standard ISO Standard thing which could perhaps be justified when standards where printed on paper.

The JPEG XL team released a draft to try to work around this but couldn't avoid it for the official standard release.

Does anyone know why the JPEG XL team went through ISO instead of publishing it themselves?

Because it is an international standard accepted by government and many other parties.

I just don't get why an image format needs the ceremony from being an international standard accepted by governments. It's just an image format; governments shouldn't be involved in this at all.

What did ISO give the JPEG XL team that made paywalling the standard worth it? Did ISO pay them or something?

I think you got it the other way around. It is JPEG XL has to pay for it to be published by ISO and certified. And the document will be edited and audited in part.

And in turns government choose format that is protected and safest to use. ISO is ( or was ) part of that equation.

It's an open standard because the concepts and reference implementation are free and open source even if the PDF is paywalled. Realistically you could just pirate the PDF and write a jpeg xl encoder/decoder and your code wouldn't be infringing on any patents.

Splitting hairs on terminology I guess. Very few people are interested in the PDF that specifies the format vs being able to include decoders in software and on devices without paying a royalty for every device. There are alternative documents and the last draft copy which are free legally. As well as the reference code.

Before the world of internet, Open does not always mean free. They are two different concept. A proprietary codec isn't open, and you can't use it everywhere unless the owner allows you to or provided tools and support. Microsoft with their WMV and Realmedia with RVMB for example. H.263 and H.264 was called an open standard at the time, any body can buy and implement it.

"Open Standard" means "Anybody is allowed to buy it"

This is false. Evaporative cooling systems consume significant amounts of water and do not reuse it. They can't anyway, recondensing the water would release all the heat they removed by evaporating it.

You don't have to evaporatively cool a data center. You can make a direct trade between energy efficiency and water consumption.

You don't HAVE to, but most of the big ones do.

You don’t have to but in hotter climates, especially those with higher energy costs (ca), it’s a lot cheaper to cool evaporatively.

How are kids supposed to have a safe space "to be curious, build autonomy, and feel free" if they can't get out from the authoritarian hands of their parents or their government?

Good question. Maybe we can find the answer by getting them drunk at the strip club - two things that we'd be authoritarians if we prevented children from accessing.

As if there's no difference between harmful substances combined with lewd activity, and talking with people on a video game.

https://metro.co.uk/2026/06/01/uk-considering-banning-kids-s...

There's also a windows port of busybox if you want something more stable. w64devkit uses it.

https://github.com/rmyorston/busybox-w32

Not similar at all - too heavy weight when you just want to use a small tool.

How the heck is a portable 637KB .exe that doesn't require any installation, extraction or admin rights to run, "too heavy weight"?

This one might interest you, although it's quite old.

https://unxutils.sourceforge.net/

Busybox's shell is ash, but the above set includes an old zsh IIRC.

Note also that the Frippery Windows busybox is available as a 64-bit version, in case 2gb is not enough (easy with some big awk associative arrays).

AI said to do it.

I liked it. It has character.

What, like electronic payments using phones running American operating systems? With the bonus that you have two new gatekeepers that can lock your citizens out (Apple and Google).

Harmony OS looks great. I cant wait for the EU version. We will again have a hilarious discussion about US apps. Peeping tom and his lawless army of handsy friskers.

So you'd switch USA for China, and still have a foreign dependency embedded into the very fabric of your society. Do you not see a problem with this?

Oh, i mean a EU Phone OS. Eventually it has to happen. It will of course be entirely ceremonial and run on chinese made hardware with US apps.