I'm not sure what your point is. virtualized or not you can run docker on any mainstream operating system using any mainstream hardware and get near native performance.
Outside of development, running containers on macOS/Windows doesn't make sense. And macOS is using emulation via Rosetta, not virtualization on M-series.
i've bought and used plenty of thinkpads over the last decade and have used the trackpoint a grand total of 0 times. it's definitely not the whole point.
There's a window where China will have it max capability to invade for the next few years. After that their population is going to start shrinking and every year will be harder than the next to invade.
But they don’t have energy independence or food security yet, which is kind of a hard requirement for an invasion.
There’s not enough rail lines and gas pipelines from Russia to feed them with significant quantities of fossil fuels.
Imagine how bad Russias invasion of Ukraine would’ve been without energy independence and food security. The invasion of Taiwan is an order of magnitude more difficult, and Taiwan now has the recipe for how to knock out the entire naval fleet of a more powerful nation (see how Ukraine has essentially incapacitated Russia in the Black Sea).
I would expect an invasion to prompt the US navy to put up a blockade, disrupting China's oil supplies and generally making it very hard to keep their economy going. Admittedly, Trump is a wild card; he's random enough that it is hard to be sure what would happen.
Not a chance. Russia has no way to deliver oil in large quantities to China. New pipelines, if they could even build them, would take many, many years.
If renewables was adequate they would not be importing vast amounts of oil.
Except TW TFR even worse than PRC TFR, and ultimately scale effect takes over - PRC with crippled TFR still generates about as much male new borns per year than TW has men 18-40 total. PRC still on trend to generate 3-4x more MEN than US projected to add population per year, incidentally around the same as active duty military... having enough bodies is not going to be an issue for decades. Having enough nukes is.
I disagree, bodies is not limitting factor for PRC, it also becomes cheaper to wait for TW specifically because TW male 18-40 is set to decline = less kill bots / occupation force needed. Attacker:defender ratio (i.e. commonly 3:1) = every defender TW loses due to demographics, PRC with same TFR will come out significantly ahead, will need less enforcement:civilian ratio for occupation.
But ultimately, it's about hardware+industry - current trend = regional force balance shifting in PRC favour vs US+co every year with no end in sight. PRC better off accumulating capabilities at scale, not just regional, but global (i.e. prompt global strike) and increase autarky (less net population + more electrifcation = more calorie + energy security). All trend incentivizes waiting and building.
TLDR waiting and building becomes less costly (or rather less risky) to pursue PRC's ultimate strategic goals associated with TW scenario... displacing US posture out of east Asia and perhaps hitting CONUS infra at scale as response to US intervention. The latter part is key, there are important stretch goals to TW scenario that secures PRC geopolitical interests for 50-100+ years. It's much more important to be able to tackle those "costly" scenarios "cheaper", where cheaper is also relative to making intervention much more expensive for adversaries, i.e. PRC "winning" hand in TW scenario is to show US posture in east asia not sustainable, and CONUS (including TSMC Arizona) not defendable.
The population of 18-30 year old males is generally what matters for an invasion and China has been shrinking that for a long time. The rest of the population can plan the invasion, but they rarely actually do it. (a few countries also invite young females to an invasion, but that is not normal)
I'm not sure where GP's 25% comes from. But there have been various assessments that China intends to "reunify" with Taiwan by 2030. [1] Xi Xinping has also instructed the PLA to be prepared to invade by 2027. [2]
If you then ask yourself whether China would rather invade during the Trump administration (with its tendencies towards isolationism and "deal making") or roll the dice on a subsequent U.S. administration, you might find yourself thinking that the odds actually seem considerably higher than 25% that this could happen in the next four years.
To the extent that this narrative comes via the U.S. intelligence/defense community, one has to assume that it may biased towards exaggerating the threat. I for one hope that is the case, since I do not want to see a U.S.-China conflict any time soon. At the same time, I unfortunately don't think it's likely to be completely baseless.
where it says available on fdroid it links to their personal fdroid repository. plenty of projects both open source and not have their own fdroid repository. fdroid is both a repository that only allows open source software and a packaging infrastructure tool for people hosting their own repositories. based on the fact their claim that they are on fdroid literally hyperlinks to their fdroid repository i don't see how anyone could find that misleading. if anything it's fdroids fault for giving their own repository the same name as their infrastructure tool instead of doing what every other project did and give them separate names. for example docker and dockerhub, flatpak and flathub, etc.
> if anything it's fdroids fault for giving their own repository the same name as their infrastructure tool instead of doing what every other project did and give them separate names. for example docker and dockerhub, flatpak and flathub, etc.
Yep, as a user I didn't find it confusing at all. F-Droid is designed for and around adding custom repos. FUTO links to their own repo and it all works fine.
I'd definitely consider this as being "available on F-Droid".
it looks like you just described the customer. apparently it isn't you. just because it isnt you and it isnt 90+ percent of people, doesn't mean it doesnt exist. there are all sorts of niche products for niche groups.
what is wrong with using it for "some part" as long as they are balancing it out with other sources? there is no such thing as a search engine that isn't biased or compromised at this point, so pulling from many sources that have different biases sounds fine to me.
you could turn that argument back on itself and say the same thing about american companies since america has been ravaging the middle east for decades.
i like that they are using a diversity of sources with a diversity of biases for their information. i don't want them to just get their information from a single biased source in the west like literally every other search engine out there.
> you could turn that argument back on itself and say the same thing about american companies since america has been ravaging the middle east for decades
Why do people always turn to whataboutism rather than engaging with the criticism directly?
i think that diversity of perspective is better than only filtering for a specific bias. i dont know how many times i need to say it before you understand me. it is in fact YOU who is deflecting rather than addressing the point. you contributed absolutely nothing with your comment.
No, the deflection is yours. The theme of this thread is that some people don't want to give money to Kagi, because Kagi gives money to Yandex, which is associated with the Russian state and provides support for its war effort in Ukraine.
The desirability of diverse perspectives in search has no bearing whatsoever on that subject.
A non-deflective response would be something like: "I know paying money to Kagi indirectly supports Russia in its war against Ukraine, but I don't give a shit about that. What really matters is that my search results must include Kremlin propaganda alongside what I consider to be US propaganda".
Now, I suspect your response is going to be something along the lines of "But Google is American and America has done lots of bad things too." So to save you some time, I'll respond in advance: That too is a deflection. It is true, but it also irrelevant to the point at hand—many Kagi users do not want their money going to the Russian state.
all sources are biased, so i would prefer it include all of them. i dont really care if some of the money goes to russia. i'm not deflecting. i don't know how i could speak more clearly.
Well, my perspective is that the Russian government is much worse than the US government, even if both are bad (although the US is getting worse).
My perspective is also that search engines like Google are bad, but they at least aren't run by the US government in the same way Yandex is run by the Kremlin.
"You can't criticize Kagi using Yandex because the US is also bad" is why it's whataboutism, and why that's not an effective argument.
"XYZ is also bad, so your criticism of ABC isn't allowed."
What you call "whataboutism" is a bullshit term used to dismiss attempts to engage with criticism directly. It's not wrong to point out that the reasoning used to diss Kagi because of Yandex association is knee-jerk nonsense, because following a principled argument would lead one to making much harder changes to their purchasing choices.
See my other comment in this thread - there are degrees to everything, and my view is that the Russian government is one of the worst. It's absolutely valid to be more critical of a Kremlin run search engine than one that's in the US, even if they both have major issues.
And my perspective is that the American alternatives are not as bad as the Russian option. Even if the American alternatives are bad, there are degrees to everything. That's the reality we live in.
I'm concerned that they're paying Yandex—I have friends in Ukraine and friends that wish they could safely be home in Ukraine, and I can't fund a company that is complicit in Putin's wartime propaganda that seeks to keep the Russian people on board with his brutal invasion of my friends' country.
It would help somewhat if the founder could clarify whether funds are going to Yandex Russia or the newly split-off Nebius. If it's the latter I could at least satisfy myself that I believe the companies to be sufficiently distinct.
on macos with lm-studio is it better to use the mlx-community releases over the one that lm-studio releases?
also I didn't install a beta and mine says i'm using 3.5 which is what the beta also says. is there a difference right now between the beta and the release version?
they run through virtualization which is clunky to interface with across boundaries and introduces overhead. I also don't think it has any hardware acceleration for things that would benefit from using the gpu.
Linux support. MacOS is a desktop first gui based operating system. Linux on the other hand is a server first cli/terminal based operating system. Everything server related is designed to on linux first and foremost and may or may not incidentally also run on MacOS.
macOS is explicitly designed to not be a server, and the consumer hardware it runs on is also designed that way. Apple even discontinued the Server tools that you could buy on the App Store that used to be called Mac OS X Server.
If you want to run Linux server apps, you should run Linux. Because Apple hardware and macOS isn't giving you any advantages over a generic piece of hardware running a Linux distribution. The hardware costs more and is less upgradable than off-the-shelf hardware.
Servers should not run desktop environments because they are a waste of resources and widen the attack surface due to having more components installed and running.
And even if you want a desktop environment for your Linux server, Linux most certainly has a wide selection of mature stable desktop environments.
If you need to do development work or just achieve the goal of running Linux applications on a Mac, that can be easily done via virtual machines, containers, etc.
If they work on a BSD they should work okay on macOS. (Not because macOS is exactly like FreeBSD, just that it means the project has been tested cross-platform.)
