m132

21 ms·

31.
by m132 4mo ago
Steve turning in his grave
32.
by m132 4mo ago
> Skimmer's design intentionally echoes DragonFly BSD's LWKT and msgport subsystems — the per-CPU runqueue, the lwkt_* API surface, the rule that cross-CPU work flows as messages rather than as direct foreign writes. DragonFly&
33.
by m132 4mo ago
I think it might be less about making money and more about burning less. From what I understand, the new Outlook is a wrapper around the code that already powers Outlook.com. Since they're already maintaining Outlook.com, they might as
34.
by m132 4mo ago
> I don't know, but maybe LLMs replacing 80% of us is exactly what we deserve. Been there, done that, but I wouldn't put the blame on engineers. You said there it yourself: > Too few engineers working with overly vague requi
35.
by m132 4mo ago
And to think that the "old" Outlook's splash screen is there for a reason: it used to take a while to open before SSDs became commonplace! Windows in general used to be usable on HDDs; SSDs would blow everyone's pants of
36.
by m132 4mo ago
I still have Sonoma on some of my devices. All I can say is: wow, steady regress. The save dialog, albeit a little shakey, is nowhere as chaotic as in your example. The buttons in Notes move between panes in a perfect seamless manner. Albei
37.
by m132 4mo ago
This is coming from the same Google that's recently restricted third-party AOSP source access to biannual releases, severely limited the scope of Pixel sources (basically just GPL now) and started concealing their change history, AND i
38.
by m132 4mo ago
One of the agent's replies indicates that scanning DN42 was part of "a broader operation" that the author speculates to be about scanning "darknets" in general. Combine that with the operator's rather obvious l
39.
by m132 4mo ago
Yes, I meant pf. Indeed, it was there in the source tree in 10.6 but they only flipped it on it in release builds in 10.7. My bad. Either way, it has hardly changed since then, while the OpenBSD upstream continued to progress. > I doubt
40.
by m132 4mo ago
Correct me if I'm wrong, but by the same logic, you could also say this whole containerization framework is of no use either. If they're investing resources into it regardless, they might at least try making something that Docker
41.
by m132 4mo ago
OpenDarwin was a thing at one point, with mailing lists and other infrastructure hosted by Apple. That being said, my point isn't that Apple should absolutely focus on making a server OS again. It just saddens me how far behind macOS h
42.
by m132 4mo ago
Every time I see Apple flaunting Linux containers I can hardly consider it as anything but admitting defeat. It could easily be Darwin, if they still had the capacity.
43.
by m132 4mo ago
CPython doesn't usually create subprocesses unless specifically asked to, it loads Python modules and native extensions into its process. The former is similar (you're still extending an existing process with new code, just interp
44.
by m132 4mo ago
Node, Python, PowerShell, and the rest do (almost) just that. launchd and systemd famously strived to remove as much shell from the start up process as possible because it was harming boot times and introducing unpredictability.
45.
by m132 4mo ago
Because it comes with a lot of overhead and, unless for some reason you really need every of those processes to have their own address space, set of privileges, file descriptors, etc., there's no point in wasting resources repeatedly s
46.
by m132 4mo ago
Wow. Rsync has to be one of the worst spaghetti projects I've worked with. It's an incredibly decent tool built around a well-though out algorithm, but its code is an exact opposite of what you'd expect. And it's written
47.
by m132 4mo ago
I'm afraid that there's never been a shortage of poor quality software
48.
by m132 4mo ago
I can somewhat see your point, but it is generally accepted that a wrong ARIA is worse than none, and LLM-assisted codebases, at least these days, only stick together thanks to testing, the more decent ones heavily emphasize in-depth human
49.
by m132 4mo ago
The problem is, mastering accessibility, intuitiveness, compatibility, responsiveness, scalability, architecture, performance, and all those other less immediately visible, "forward-thinking" parts of UX/software development
50.
by m132 5mo ago
Maybe it's just me, but I'm incredibly surprised by their prompt reaction to this. As a user, I was already preparing to deal with this myself. Wow, is this how things were before bureaucratic behemoths took over the tech industry
51.
by m132 5mo ago
Love the summaries, I must say some stories I haven't considered interesting seeing them in the original HN view only caught my attention after my eyes landed on the summary. At the same time, I very much dislike the layout. Masonry-st
52.
by m132 5mo ago
Since ACPI was mentioned, let's not forget about EFI! https://uefi.org/specs/UEFI/2.10/22_EFI_Byte_Code_Virtual_Ma...
53.
by m132 5mo ago
Didn't expect this to come from him. Seeing some of his recent YouTube streams and previous blog posts, he seemed like he has unconditionally bought into the idea of vibecoding, even as he had Opus 4.5 (latest at the time) stuck failin
54.
by m132 5mo ago
Read the Oodle article in full, fantastic investigation indeed! It also looks like there's a slight difference in the unwanted effect both companies have reported, despite the bug being seemingly triggered the same way (mov touching th
55.
by m132 5mo ago
The absolute state of the Hacker News main page in 2026. Thank you for taking your time to put it all together.
56.
by m132 5mo ago
Only if you used a breakpoint or something similar. I believe a "shadow" exception vector like that can run entirely in the guest context with the guest not even being aware of this (MRS is generally always trapped so you can retu
57.
by m132 5mo ago
> instead of trapping to the hypervisor My bad! I mean, ehh, I guess you could maintain a breakpoint in the guest kernel's exception vector table or have QEMU inject its own "zero-level exception handler" whose only purpos
58.
by m132 5mo ago
> It was a kernel panic for Tahoe. Ah, must be something else then. > normal guests aren't supposed to do that Oh how I wish Arm didn't let anything like this slip into the architecture spec to begin with! Massive source of
59.
by m132 5mo ago
Looks like someone beat me to it! Thanks! I see the author of this patch set has run into a few similar issues as me. Strangely, not all of them: I don't see patches for the new PCI MSI-X device introduced somewhere in Sequoia (IIRC),
60.
by m132 5mo ago
Oh, thanks for letting me know, and for the upstreaming work too! I might join the party once I find some more time :)

More ›