Yeah but nobody else has as many a FreeBSD developers on staff to fix stuff when it breaks. Or, you know, to run monthly stabilization weeks and extensively QA before deploying to a herd of cattle.
There are so many factors in favour of Netflix running 16.0 which don't apply elsewhere.
14.4 is a maintenance release. If you're installing FreeBSD today, use 15.0
This is not the recommendation of the FreeBSD project. (I would know, because I'm the person in the project who makes that recommendation where appropriate.)
Once X.1-RELEASE ships, (X-1).* is considered "legacy" and we recommend that it is used primarily for maintaining existing systems and that new systems are deployed with the newer major version. But at when it comes to 14.4 vs 15.0 we're not there yet; .0 releases are always a bit bumpy and it's very much a judgement call at this point about how much risk people want to take.
By the way - does 32bit packages 'problem' for WINE has been resolved on 15.x series?
On 14.x and older versions WINE brings `/usr/local/share/wine/pkg32.sh` to keep 32bit packages for WINE32 ... but 15.x does not build 32bit packages anymore ...
Writing the release announcement for FreeBSD 14.4! The release is ready (aside from propagating to mirrors and clouds) but I have until 2026-03-10 00:00 UTC to get the announcement email ready to go out.
Yeah, I would definitely characterize it as an instruction following problem. After a few more round trips I got it to admit that "my earlier passes leaned heavily on build/tests + targeted reads, which can miss many “deep” bugs that only show up under specific conditions or with careful semantic review" and then asking it to "Please do a careful semantic review of files, one by one." started it on actually reviewing code.
Mind you, the bugs it reported were mostly bogus. But at least I was eventually able to convince it to try.
In the same vein, algebraic irrationals (e.g., √2) all have an irrationality measure of two, but the proof of this is fiendishly difficult and netted its discoverer the Fields Medal back in 1958.
It's worth noting that this is a standard method of proving that a value is transcendental -- just show that it has better rational approximations than any algebraic number can have.
It's a standard way of proving that transcendental numbers exist, because it's easy to construct very well-approximable numbers, but so far as I know it isn't a common way to prove that a number you were already interested in is transcendental. For pretty much every number you might be interested in, the best-known lower bound on that exponent is 2, which of course isn't good enough to prove transcendence.
At least, that's my understanding of where things stand, but I'm not an expert. Do you have counterexamples?
The Champernowne numbers were already known to be irrational, but this makes the proof much easier!
(But to clarify: When I said "proving that a value is transcendental", I was thinking of numbers specifically constructed for that purpose, not of other numbers more generally. 100% of transcendental numbers have irrationally measure 2.)
Related: In FreeBSD we used to talk often about the Wemm Field. Peter Wemm was one of the early FreeBSD developers and responsible for most of the early project server cluster, and hardware had a phenomenal habit of breaking in his vicinity. One notable story I heard involved transporting servers between data centers and hitting a Christmas tree in the middle of a highway... in March.
Oh, I don't know. I quite like radioactivity. My Dad (RAF bomber pilot) had a pilots watch with radium luminous dials. I always fancied getting it after his death, about 12 years ago, but nobody could find it - my brothers denied all knowledge, and I have absolutely no reason to doubt them. So it must be somewhere irradiating the roaches that will become our inevitable successors.
Oh, I entirely agree. There are cool ways that radioactivity can be used entirely safely.
But I also understand that a lot of people don't understand -- so I see why even entirely safe uses of radioactivity are concerning to the public, even though they shouldn't be.
Indeed. If everything is a priority, nothing is a priority; you only know that something is a real priority when you get an answer to the question "what will you sacrifice for this".
The ones that still assume big brother will be spying on and killing the people they hate. Trump openly campaigned on getting revenge on his enemies. I can only assume his supporters want this. The danger of course is if/when the leopards eat their faces
I guess the problem for Trump is if he orders the army to gun down protesters, there’s a good chance they will refuse to do it. While a bot can just be prompted to go ahead.
Crazy to think how Deus Ex: Human revolution might have gotten the timeline right. Except there's no human augmentation and there won't be citizen fighting four-legged robot police in 2027 Detroit with molotov cocktails: they'll only hear a disconcerting buzz coming at them with ludicrous speed before eternal darkness.
There are so many factors in favour of Netflix running 16.0 which don't apply elsewhere.
reply