So where will Musk find that missing information and how will he detect “errors”?

There’s Dave Cutler in the article. They both heard boss music and it wasn’t theirs.

See, Dave Cutler’s level of “boss” for Unix would be Kirk McCusick or Bill Joy.

Yes, this is bullshit.

While some sort of a redesign of part of Linux’s internals I could imagine.

In terms of kernel ABI stability Linux is often criticized even in comparison to BSDs.

And in general its insides are more messy and “naturally grown”, or so I’ve heard (OpenBSD is the only OS whose internals I’ve made myself familiar with sufficiently ; also put some effort for FreeBSD).

So my, eh, alternative opinion would be that something is brewing for Linux like what Digital Unix was for BSD Unix. A hybrid cleaned up kernel, maybe support for different ABIs (like what exists in FreeBSD for Linux and older versions of itself, except maybe more ambitious). Maybe even tackling a more open alternative to NT (itself alternative to VMS and David Cutler being the man who did that) while they’re at it. NT is not a bad thing. Even Windows is not a bad thing. Maybe Wine isn’t enough, or maybe it would be cool to have something possible to make compatible with many Windows device drivers.

At least I hope it’s Linux learning to do EEE and not the other way around.

Though with Bill Gates and Dave Cutler this really seems like a meeting of legends and nothing more. They’re cool people, but I don’t think they want to play global thermonuclear computing war at that age, unlike just global thermonuclear war IRL, this one is more attractive for younger people. Even if it’s about some project being born, I’d expect that to be “just for fun” for everyone involved, they deserve that after all.

Is it more or less efficient than a grass roof?

Ye-es, and if you call your automation “industrial planning\programming\optimization” the way I’ve seen it first in a student book, you won’t be understood at all, despite that literally describing what you are doing.

Probably making every piece of progress part of popular culture wasn’t a good idea.

But that started in the middle of XX century, with various new materials based on oil products being regularly invented.

Events analogous to a “new material” with computers are a bit rare and very removed from the customer. Yet the popular culture demands some show of progress. They don’t see a lot of real progress in UI\UX\web - monopolies and stuff. So - new applications become subjects of such hype.

I remember the P2P hype, that was kinda real. Torrents felt like magic.

I remember the “metaverse” hype, that’s rather old, I didn’t find any satisfaction for that, but probably a group of friends and a Second Life instance could be nice. Minecraft suffices for people today, it’s easier and cool enough.

I also remember “dynamic web” hype in my childhood, webpages were static, you’d press F5 to check new posts on a roleplaying forum. But there were nice-looking, dynamic, cool, and very inconvenient Flash applications here and there. You wanted to have both the cleanness and interop of the Web and the power and wow-factor of such applications. I wanted that too. Now I understand how dumb I was.

The cryptocurrencies hype - it was a legitimate subject of discussions for intelligent people, how do you use cryptography to create a value exchange resilient to oppression, because without exchanging real value freedom is not achievable. That was, unfortunately, in the narrow understanding of the rules where the government can demand something from you, but can’t force you or torture you or steal from you. Thus BTC is not anonymous, intentionally.

There was simultaneously the big data hype, it was discussed as if it’s not Google’s and FB’s pathway to power, but the opposite - finding systemic traits in human societies, probably using that analysis to build a better web, yadda-yadda.

Then that mutated to the AI hype. But that also wasn’t about yelling “we found AI, give us money”, that was about neural nets yielding funny texts and discussions as to whether good enough imitation is real intelligence.

Almost like fashion.

Teaching kids war is good in any case. Teaching kids that war is good is bad.

Unfortunately that’s useless, the people needing to be hit are all kinda distributed over all of Russia, and the punishment is severe.

But teaching children to build tools for modern war is an absolute positive. Possessing an AK is no good for a revolution today anyway, while with small drones you can do a lot.

Equating Israel to USA in its right to exist is not swallowing its cock.

They are right. Except one problem still can be solved, the other not so much. Maybe a few centuries after now somebody will think of something. Slow demographic changes and more modern weapons, that stuff.