Oh, so that’s why Google is killing sideloading.

Then again, I could have accomplished the same thing by knocking off work for the day and going to the driving range.

Hey, look at the bright side, as long as you were chained to your desk instead, that’s all that matters.

uninformed for skeptical

Perhaps one begets the other.

The article is not fishy, you are just uninformed. They are powering the datacenter with turbines fueled by natural gas. You are right about the datacenter though, it’s beyond fishy, into crime territory. To top it all off, they have approval to run only a handful of turbines (after not even seeking approval in the first place, i.e. running them illegally), but they are running a ton of them.

*looks around* That’s a pretty big if.

I feel there’s a certain sad irony about the domain on that link.

I am having flashbacks to the scene in Idiocracy where the doctor is talking about his wife.

Autopilot hasn’t received any updates for years.

Like I said, demonstrates neglect.

If Kleenex were the only ones doing facial tissue, then this could be, “toilet paper vs. Kleenex”, and you’d be wondering “why isn’t this Charmin vs Kleenex?” while Charmin happened to be the TP brand they chose because they had access to it.

Tesla is the only one doing camera-only self driving, so there’s no point in delineating the two. Lidar you can expect from any other brand, so it’s a token choice in this instance, especially for an engineering entertainment video.

Autopilot is just adaptive cruise control that keeps the car in lane.

Anyone who watches the video in question knows this statement is misleading. Autopilot also stops when it detects an obstacle in the way (well, it’s supposed to, but the video demonstrates otherwise). Furthermore, decades old adaptive cruise from other brands will stop too because even they have classic radar or laser range-finding.

If even the most basic go no-go + steer operation based on computer vision can’t detect and stop before obstacles, why trust an even more complicated solution? If they don’t back-port some apparent detection upgrade from fsd to the basic case, that demonstrates even further neglect anyway.

The whole point that everyone is dancing around is that Tesla gambled that cheaping out by using only cameras would be fine, but it cannot even match decades-old technology for the basic case.

Did they test it against decades old adaptive cruise? No, that’s been solved, but they did test it against that technology’s next generation, and it ran circles around vision not backed by a human brain.

We build our own prisons.

Sorry you are getting downvoted for being one of today’s 10,000

That’s great, thanks! I really appreciate the detailed response and the links.

The methodology IS cloud native

Ok great. Is it also fair to say that cloud native is the methodology? Or is cloud native a higher order concept that the methodology can fall into? I.e. rock is music, but music is not rock.

Dude, thank you for this. IMO reducing that down to simply “cloud native” is doing a disservice to how absolutely cool that methodology is.

I loved RancherOS in the server space, and always wished there could be a desktop version of it, but I realize that the isolation of docker on docker would be very difficult to deal with for desktop applications. From your description, I feel like Bazzite has done the next best thing.

If I may frame things in RancherOS terms and perspective briefly, given your description of what’s going on with Bazzite, the System Docker container image is being built in the cloud every day, and you could pull it down, reboot, and have the latest version of the OS running. The difference, I am gathering from context, is that while RancherOS “boots” the system image in docker, Bazzite simply abandons RancherOS’s hypervisor-esq system docker layer, and does something like simply mount the image layers at boot time (seeing as how the kernel is contained within the image), and boots the kernel and surrounding OS from that volume. The image is simultaneously a container volume and a bare metal volume. In the cloud, it’s a container volume for purposes of builds and updates, which greatly simplifies a bunch of things. Locally, the image is a bootable volume that is mounted and executed on bare metal. Delivery of updates is literally the equivalent of “docker pull” and a boot loader that can understand the local image registry, mount the image layer volumes appropriately, and then boot the kernel from there.

Do I have this roughly correct?

Hey there, I’m the founder of Bazzite.

Hey man, so great you are here! What an opportunity that you came here to provide clarity. Thanks for being here!

Just wanted to confirm that we have no interest in VC funding. we’re [not] marketing to people with too much money and a lack of sense

That’s super great to hear. Refreshing in fact.

Putting a whole distro together is a monumental task. Why have you gone to all the effort to do so? What does Bazzite bring to the table that can’t be found by using any other distribution? For everyone who is currently using, say, fedora, why should they all switch to Bazzite today? (I am currently running fedora and I am thinking about a change, can you give me a reason to jump?)

As someone who builds and deploys software in the cloud all day, seeing the term “cloud native” used for a desktop OS just reads as jibberish to me, no offense. Nobody can seem to explain clearly in simple terms what is actually meant by it.

Does it just mean all of the compilation of binaries and subsequent packaging have all been designed and set up to run in a uniform build pipeline that can be executed in the cloud? Or is bazzite just basically RancherOS (RIP) but for the desktop? I am seeing people in this thread talking along the lines of both of these things, but they are not the same.

Can you explain what the term “cloud native” means as it relates to bazzite in a way that someone who can build Linux from scratch, understands CI/CD, and uses docker/kubernetes/whatever to deploy services in the cloud, could grok the term in short order?

“We will provide you with a tool to emit garbage and a platform to share content. If you put the two together, you are liable.”

Attractive nuisance much? Is it too much to ask that they should have to label it a garbage generator instead of “AI”? Why does honesty always have to take a back seat?

Exactly

Tell me you are too oblivious to implement CI/CD without telling me you’re too oblivious to to implement CI/CD. Their builds and packaging should have been fully automated if it was such a pain. If you can make a Mac version of any software, you can make a Linux version. The debate internally was likely management being dumb as rocks and overruling anyone who actually knows anything.

Might be this dude; it is not free, just very affordable in their market. It turns out making it affordable also brings in a lot of revenue.

https://youtu.be/44Do5x5abRY