anonymousab

The real kicker is that he sees any thorough human review of security critical code - even if that code is 100% AI generated - as "handcrafting code".

You just can't trust software being developed under such a man's leadership to be secure. It's a fatal mark against their raison d'etre.

> they shared numbers around the scale they're dealing with now that everyone is constantly building and pushing with AI.

That is an active choice they are making, over and instead of any reliability for the rest of their users.

It is a problem they are embracing, and actively encouraging, for themselves.

Allowing and accepting the LLM load is a willful choice they made and are making at the expense of their users, including their paying enterprise users.

They could easily tighten things up in that regard, and make a choice that is right for their main users at the expense of The MS corpo mandate/mission. It is a choice to do otherwise.

It seems vastly higher on every region and VPN I've tested, so I think this is a case of the "technicalies".

It is technically 20%, because a bunch of the requests that happen on page load do succeed. Just not the few crucial ones that are required for the page to load correctly - those return a 500 the vast supermajority of the time.

Even getting through the discussions and negotiations with the 3 big game console companies to support their platforms can eat up so much of your time window. You can't really vibecode your way out of that - though I suppose you could generate your email responses or an AI meeting participant and risk blowing up the business relationship.

Looks like it doesn't handle high impedance headphones well either. Oof.

It is not an overreaction at all to them replacing the principled leader who promised things with the vulture leader whose job and job history is primarily to enshittify things and sell them off.

5% would already be well within the margin of difference for separate identical clean installations of windows on the same hardware.

But the issue is that it is many multiples of that, especially on the most common PC gaming hardware (Nvidia GPUs), often more than a 25% difference in framerates. Not so important at 144fps, but very important at a 60fps baseline and for genres like fighting games.

A lot of people don't mind, say, an extra 5 frames of input delay. They don't notice it. But a lot of people do notice even an extra 2 or 3.

I do think that frame pacing issues kinda do have a critical thin threshold where it's either bearable or an unacceptable difference. And the native windows version can often already be riding right on that line. So while it's not fair to the Linux version to demand better, it is unfortunately the case that it might tip over that line.

One problem is that having better FPS stops mattering if the frame pacing and timing is bad, making the game feel like a juddery mess. Or if there is significant input delay differences.

That's why all the data matters for all of these dimensions; game performance is much more than FPS per watt over time.

When people see "linux gaming is great now, look at the fps" it comes across as potentially disengenuous because of all the other factors that matter and should be tested. Or rather, if a reviewer is talking entirely about framerate, then I just can't trust their opinion and expertise when it comes to the state of Linux gaming.

Yet another day where 'pull_request_target` is allowed to exist and cause tons of pain. They really ought to kill it off by now.

I expect that the US administration will very quickly ban these cars from being leased or resold into the US from Canada.

...if they're not banned from entering the USA altogether, which seemed to be the way the US President was leaning already.