I wonder if we'll still be running x86 code a hundred years after it came out (according to Wikipedia, it came out in 1978). We are already 48 years in.
Really when people say x86 now tho they don't mean that. They really mean the variant introduced with the 386 which has a linear memory model, memory protection, etc. Or x86_64 which is philosophically akin to the 386 but really a new ISA.
So it's really more like mid-80s or early 2000s, not late 70s.
You can't run a COM program today. Not without emulation. Recent PCs can't even run DOS EXE because they're missing the BIOS interrupts most DOS programs use.
UEFI switches the CPU into 32bit v86 mode or directly in 64bit mode and you can't go back to real mode without a CPU reset, which v86 won't allow (you don't have ring -2 privileges) and 64bit mode can't do at all. I don't have a UEFI system, so I might be wrong (I even hope I'm wrong - it would mean slightly more freedom still exists), but from what I read about it, I'm 90% certain it's not possible.
You're confusing several things here. The only x86 processor that didn't allow returning to real mode was the 16-bit 80286 - on all later ones it's as simple as clearing bit 0 of CR0 (and also disabling paging if that was enabled).
Nothing more privileged than ring 0 is required for that.
"v86" is what allowed real mode to be virtualized under a 32-bit OS. This is no longer available in 64-bit mode, but the CPU still includes it (as well as newer virtualization features which could be used to do the same thing).
Even if you could/can it is an anachronism. Architecturally there's just a huge difference between 8086 and even 80286 and the 386. Before the 386 I wouldn't touch a machine with an Intel processor in it. Once the 386/486 penetrated the market and became cheap it was game over for everything else because it was good enough (linear address space, memory protection, larger address space, 32-bit etc etc), smart enough, gosh darn it it was cheap and everywhere.
No, you are wrong. DOS COM files if 16 bit can't be run on 64 bit CPU's but 32 bit DOS binaries can be run under 32 bit GNU/Linux installs with DosEMU straight by just emulating the BIOS part, the rest is native.
Set seg_32bit=0 and you can create 16-bit code and data segments. Still works on 64 bit. What's missing is V86 mode, which emulates the real mode segmentation model.
50/50, because once you boot a 32 bit os you can run 16 bit binaries :)
I'm pretty sure that if I make a dual-kernel 9front (9pc and 9pc64 available at boot) in a 64 bit machine and I compile emu2 for it, DOS COM binaries might be trapped enough to run simple text mode tools under the 386 port.
Let's say you have 15 programs installed. You use programs 1-5 multiple times a day, 6-10 every few days, 11-15 every couple of weeks.
The AI makes a change. It rebuild the image. Things are working.
A few days later, you go to use one the 10-15 programs that haven't been used for a week or two and it doesn't work. The change could have been that day or a couple of weeks ago. How do you remedy that? Thanks in advance for your insights.
That's a real scenario and it's happened to me. The key is that NixOS keeps every previous
generation — so when I discover program #12 is broken, I can nix store diff-closures to see
exactly what changed between generations, or just boot into the last known-good generation
from GRUB.
In practice I do two things: I keep a quick smoke-test habit after rebuilds (open a couple of
the less-used apps), and the git history tells me exactly which .nix change touched what.
Since every rebuild is a commit, git bisect works on your OS the same way it works on code.
It's not perfect — I've definitely had the "wait, when did this break?" moment. But the
recovery path is always under a minute, which makes the cost of experimentation very low.
> Very cruel, and wrong to go after a vulnerable population.
absolutely true
> Sexual identity isn't anyone else's business.
well some did insist to have sexual identity "courses" in school and everywhere, leading to many people, sometime as young as 13 being pushed to get masectomies or other horrific stuff they did regret afterwards. something had to be done
Your driver's license has your height, weight, etc. that is current. You certainly wouldn't want your birth weight, birth height on there. It is used to identify you, as you are today.
If you are searching for a person, you would want to use their current description.
“Following a comprehensive review, we determined the planned Flock Safety integration would require significantly more time and resources than anticipated,” Ring’s statement said
Given the timeline of the change, Amazon was capable of doing the review very quickly.
Why didn't they do the review before launching, and perhaps even working on the feature? What new data did they receive that resulted in this change in their posture?
The Microsoft response is very disingenuous because if they knew about the situation and let it get to the current situation, then it means they really didn't care. If they didn't know then, they are clueless.
I think the reality is that they are super confused, don't have a vision, and therefore, no strategy. They are just like a marble bouncing in a pachinko machine.
For example, look at the churn on the UI framework - I think they have gone through three or more frameworks in the last few years.
The constant updates are just huge. I don't think on Linux they use anti-virus software. I'm sure it is nice not losing perf to the AV. I think the windows file system throughput for small files is horrid compared to Linux.
reply