> As to all the people saying “I’m going to package openrsync for platform XXX and we’ll use that!”. I find that rather amusing. If you do decide to go down that path I’d suggest you try the new rsync test suite on openrsync if you can stomach something that an AI has helped write. I tried it today and openrsync currently fails 85 of 98 tests, so I’m sure it won’t take you long to get it up to speed. You run it like this “./runtests.py — rsync-bin=../openrsync/openrsync — use-tcp”. Admittedly a lot of the failures are just features openrsync doesn’t have, but still, it’s not a great result.
I have already been using openrsync even before the recent AI drama.
Just like I have been using doas for several years.
All I need is `rsync -urvP` and I suspect the majority of users don't need the advanced features either.
The smaller code base also means less bugs and vulnerabilities. As an example doas is ~1k lines vs 160k for sudo. That surely means a smaller attack surface. The same is true for openrsync and rsync at approximately 18k vs 57k lines.
> Even if there was less RAM or worse specs than the Snapdragon at the time, iPhone was still faster and sold more.
iPhone had worse display for a _very_ long time.
The Galaxy S1 had an OLED display. It took Apple 7 years to introduce that technology in their premium lineup, and 10 years to introduce it to their regular lineup.
A quick web search told me that this was introduced in 2010 (could be Google AI lying, I didn't look further). If that's accurate, there's really no comparison. A better screen on an OS that was catching up at the time… I'm not really sure when Android became a good competitor, but I don't think it was quite there in 2010.
I remember trying out Android tablets at a store ~2017. They were all trash. I couldn't believe it. I don't know where they are now, but IMO both the iPhone and the iPad shipped with high quality 1.0 software, despite deficiencies like a lack of copy/paste on iPhone 1.0.
Other companies were shipping devices with lackluster software for a good amount of time. Android became a real smartphone OS a long time ago. I assume it's reasonable on tablets today. But there was a period of time where it was a pretty terrible regardless of hardware specs. Kinda like the iPad now.
Games will get pirated regardless whether they're on GOG or not.
> This model works for games on GOG because they tend to be priced so low that most users are okay with paying for convenience. Many of the games in that catalog are essentially back catalog that have been paid off for years and whose sales are quite insignificant to the publisher.
Likewise, Cyberpunk 2077 was released on GOG 4 months after the Steam release. And IIRC the game's revenue didn't cover its costs until ~2 years later.
You're right. My bad. I was looking at the price changes in gogdb, and price tracking started a few months after launch. But the details page shows the Global release date and the GOG release date.
I think you are at least partially reinforcing my point here. Two of your three examples had a delayed release on GOG, and that's pretty telling especially considering one of those two was developed and published by GOG's former parent company.
Two of the three examples are solidly in the realm of indie titles.
Yes, there are big release games on the platform. I see, for example, that Silent Hill f is on GOG.
I will generally agree that piracy eventually happens, but a lot of DRM has made piracy impractical for critical early weeks of a game's release.
I think different video game publishers have different opinions on the matter and both sides have a lot of validity. I also think that different types of games have different rates of piracy, as it can be a crime of convenience or not.
If your game's demographics skews more educated, affluent, and/or older, I would imagine that piracy rates will be lower. Perhaps your game is more popular in some countries over others that have different laws and/or cultural norms surrounding piracy.
> Two of your three examples had a delayed release on GOG, and that's pretty telling especially considering one of those two was developed and published by GOG's former parent company.
Broadband/fiber internet accessible to all residents of the USA, anyone? Always love reading about how the telcos took that tax money, hemmed and hawed, and ended up never fully delivering what they agreed to.
I wouldn't call it a honeypot, but it's probably compromised by the feds.
It was shown a few years back that if you control enough of the exit nodes (more than some specific % that I don't remember off the top of my head) then you can associate traffic across most/all of the Tor network. Since running exit nodes is relatively cheap the assumption was that the feds (or some other state actor) were already doing so.
I'd call that materially different than a honeypot though since it wasn't designed for that purpose.
Wait, I can download and run iOS on my own hardware? Not that I have tried, but I always thought Apples whole schtick was you were only allowed to run their software on their latest X revisions of their hardware?
> There are still some people who need to run 32-bit applications that cannot be updated; the solution he has been pushing people toward is to run a 32-bit user space on a 64-bit kernel. This is a good solution for memory-constrained systems; switching to 32-bit halves the memory usage of the system. Since, on most systems, almost all memory is used by user space, running a 64-bit kernel has a relatively small cost. Please, he asked, do not run 32-bit kernels on 64-bit processors.
It's not a fork, but it's 8 years old, and is already shipped by default in OpenBSD and macOS.
reply