Furus are "fake gurus." It comes from the Fintwit space where "furus" share their +1000% option trades as if they're geniuses in order to get you to sign up for their expensive Substack.
> Imagine two very similar companies. Both companies generate similar revenue and produce a similar software product. The only difference between these companies is that Company A uses 1 million lines of code and Company B uses 100 thousand lines of code. Which company is better off?
Company A uses a good framework that allows underlings to make for their middle managers reports which those middle managers use to demonstrate that their portion of the company is providing value. Upper management is well pleased, and refrains from laying off those productive portions.
Company B has no framework, and underlings cannot produce good reports for middle managers. Upper management fires at random, and great lamentations go up across the land.
More seriously: You can spend money to make money in the software world, and making a good abstraction is well worth the effort. There might just be a reason we us OSes these days instead of writing every application to sit directly on hardware. That might be the result of some actual thought.
Better than going the Multics way, which was being theoretically portable but not actually capable of being ported off a very short list (two... a list of two) mainframe computers that implement an architecture with no future.
I certainly agree that drivers and portability are Linux's best features (NetBSD scores even better on portability and compatibility.) The point of the comparison was to say that the code and memory size cost of Multics (and its core functionality and abstractions) was considered prohibitive in 1969 when Unix was being created, but is basically in the noise for systems like Linux in 2025.
Sadly segmentation fell out of vogue and was dropped from x86 because ... no OS ended up using it! (Though it was used in the 32-bit implementation of Google Native Client, a sandboxed environment for safely running x86 code.)
But a Multics-informed design is not inherently unportable or antithetical to drivers. Ring-based security can allow for better isolation and easier driver development. Maybe even ingesting and reusing all of those linux drivers?
It gives more than C, as the days of it being a portable high level assembly are long gone.
Plus for those that love their pre-processor, proper macro assemblers are quite powerful, unlike those UNIX assemblers that were designed to be used as part of C compilation pipeline with very few amenities.
> "It's 1900 UTC, X is awake from....err....2200 to 1400, so I can call now"
Assuming it's that simple of course. Like, you can do mental math about what UTC "officially means" for someone many miles away, but people coordinate with others even if it means their local schedule is not aligned with that ideal case. Time zones account for this by being wider or narrower than their Platonic 15° of longitude ideal in some places.
> A man who was arrested by police in England for asking who elected King Charles III says he’s worried that his arrest could have a “chilling effect” on freedom of expression in the country.
That's the whole point of a constitutional monarchy!
The king's literal job is to not be the government. He gets to be the emotional symbol of the country and be treated with respect in exchange for promising to never actually do anything.
Most of them pretend the monarch is allowed to do things (as long as the government tells them what to do first), but in Japan and Sweden they don't even have that power. The emperor of Japan is basically just a prisoner we (the US, who wrote their constitution) keep in a palace for fun. They seem to like this and have taken to being the most boring family possible; the current emperor's official hobby is "water" and he stopped playing the violin because he thought it was too interesting.
As for why the UK still has lese majeste, beats me.
At a certain point, the genericized trademark is the correct term, like how aspirin is the correct term (only term, really) for a specific preparation of acetylsalicylic acid, even though it was a trademark of the Bayer corporation.
reply