Windows requirements: sprawling list of unsupported hardware based on an arbitrary requirment for a security chip that doesn’t actually improve security at all
Yes they do. Microcontrollers contain a microprocessor that is optimized for branching instructions and already include memory and peripheral interfaces which are connected directly to the processor bus (opposed to general purpose CPUs).
It’s not even a matter of when. I was recently given an i7 6700K, and no game, old or new, comes close to fully using it, and it’s not even overclocked. If anyone is in doubt about the requirement being artificial, try this CPU.
The windows 11 cpu requirement isn’t a requirement per se but a “it’s validated to work on this or newer”. 6th gen Intel is no problem. Even 4th gen or older aren’t a problem, performance wise. The problem is the mandatory TPM 2.0 support. Intel CPUs only massively support that from 6th gen on and AMD CPUs even later (I think Zen 2). On some older boards you might have luck, especially if you buy a hardware TPM but my PC for example, running a i7 3770, only has a TPM 1.2 and no way to upgrade to 2.0. Now, there are ways to circumvent the need for a TPM all together on Win 11 but tbh, Win 10 installs perfectly well still on Hardware as old as Athlon 64 and in my experience even better than 11 anyways.
It’s a requirement both on paper and in that, even though Microsoft document an official way to bypass it, they will warn you that they do not even guarantee security updates unless your CPU is supported. Moreover, we know of at least one game, Valorant, that will not work on Windows 11 unless you are meeting its hardware requirements. The bottom line is that installing Windows 11 is a risk.
True, but getting that thing that’s older than you to actually work is going to require recompiling your kernel with some specific options, downloading a driver from an obscure git repo, running a tool to generate a config file, manually editing that config, and then running another tool to install the driver and then troubleshooting what went wrong.
Oh, wait, that was me trying to use my relatively new Sound Blaster sound card when experimenting with Linux 20 years ago. Linux had terrible support for ISA Plug and Play cards for some reason.
By comparison my solution to windows dropping support for a thing was to grab the cheapest PC I could find that might hypothetically work and stick an old version of windows on it that still had support and just not connect it to the Internet.
20 years ago? Try installing Linux on that same hardware now. Now try installing Windows?
Try the same experiment with any hardware 5 years old or older. Linux wins every time.
People will say that on newer hardware, Windows is better. Partially true. New hardware that was designed to ship with Windows will work better. A fair comparison would be hardware that ships with Linux.
Proprietary firmware has always been an issue ( like Broadcom and like NVIDIA ), especially on distros like Debian that could not ship non-free firmware. The situation has improved though. Even NVIDIA will ship out of the box soon. And Debian will shop non-free firmware now so those old Broadcom cards should work.
One of my favourite things about Linux is how much easier it is to get it running on random hardware, especially “out of the box” without having to track down drivers or install stuff after. With older Apple hardware, it is not just easier but it may be the only way to use modern software at all. I confess though that I am mostly speaking about older hardware.
Hell, I can get a 30 year old HP LaserJet 4 printer working just fine on almost any version of Linux with the official HPLIP CLI software provided by (shockingly) HP, which was updated 2 months ago with support for over 50 new printers and the following OSes:
LinuxMint 21.1
MxLinux 21.3
Elementary OS 7
Ubuntu 22.10
RHEL 8.6
RHEL 8.7
RHEL 9.1
Fedora 37
I HATE HP and their printers (PC LOAD LETTER WTF FOR LIFE) but I will admit that this is impressive support.
How long do any of you idiots upvoting this think it’ll be until these (so-called) “rangers” start selling rhino horn themselves? That is… if they haven’t already and this is really just them clearing out the competition?
No. You are. This meme demonstrates how easily first-worlders will slavishly applaud fascist terrorism in the third-world as long as you wrap it up in green capitalism first.
The only thing these privatised death-squads you call “rangers” are doing is waging unrestricted warfare on impoverished brown people while (at best) doing absolutely nothing to hinder the mass-slaughter of wild life or (at worst) simply monopolizing it for their own profit - but you get your “eco-friendly” revenge-porn in exchange, so everything’s cool, right?
I actually don't disagree with your general point, but the idea (and the fact that your fist thought was) that the rangers will turn around and start poaching rhinos themselves seems like a really odd argument to be making if your aim is the capitalists who create and uphold the industry in the first place.
E: like, you focusing on the rangers is exactly the same as other people focusing on the poachers - neither are in charge and both are there making money for people who would never get their hands dirty.
that the rangers will turn around and start poaching rhinos themselves
None of this is difficult to understand - it’s no different than the right-wing death squads the US trained to fight their little “War On Drugs” suddenly and not-so-mysteriously ending up the biggest players in the drug-smuggling business.
Who did you think these “rangers” work for? They are pigs - that’s what they are. And like all pigs, profiting from the illegal things they are (supposedly) “preventing” is merely one of the unspoken but universal perks of the job. As long as their violence serves the capitalists that wants to exclusively loot and pillage natural resources, everybody in power will turn a blind eye. And it’s not just the trade in animal parts - don’t be surprised when it’s discovered that these privatized goon squads being lauded in the media for their (supposed) “anti-poaching” activities take their orders from multi-national mining corporations or companies that want to exploit local populations as cheap labor.
I’m Indian, although I live hundreds of kilometres away from the place in question. My very first thought was that these rangers are going to kill innocent people and frame them as poachers. My second thought was that at least a few of them might start poaching themselves.
I hope I’m wrong, maybe this is one of the few such programmes that actually works out, but the history of the Indian forest department does not inspire much confidence. The Forest department was created by the British to protect game from local people, and even today far too many officials treat the indigenous tribals as enemies, rather than as allies in conservation.
If you think I’m being too cynical or melodramatic, you are welcome to read articles and books by Indian ecologists, historians and conservationists such as Madhav Gadgil, Ullas Karanth and Ram Guha.
Corruption? Indian rangers are basically police. They’re uniformed and armed, and apparently have orders to kill. ACAB
I was in a car once when the driver accidentally went into a restricted forest area, and he just gave the guards a bribe to let us out without punishment. They’re presumably better than the actual police generally, but in the tribal areas they can be just as bad.
taking a bribe because someone kinda broke the law without causing harm is not the same as killing the animals you are supposed to protect, like whole orders of magnitude different.
Yeah I’m not saying those two are the same things. However I read some articles where tribal people and villagers claimed to be shot on sight for wandering into parks, then tortured for protesting this.
My point was just that the sentiment for forest rangers in the US or elsewhere doesn’t necessarily apply to India. The forest department might be more like the Bureau of Indian Affairs in some cases
However I read some articles where tribal people and villagers claimed to be shot on sight for wandering into parks, then tortured for protesting this.
that’s interesting. much more compelling than the other things.
It’s almost as if accountable killings being backed and cheered on by powerful governments and business interest attracts the wrong crowd. If Jeff Dahmer was stronger and smarter im sure he would’ve applied to similar organizations .
Operation Lock was apparently the first major privately funded African antipoaching project, and may have been the most sinister, not least because poachers may have been among the major beneficiaries of it.
“To implement Operation Lock,” Ellis wrote, “Dr. Hanks commissioned KAS Enterprises Ltd., whose chair was the late Sir David Stirling, the founder of the Special Air Services. Many of the KAS staff were former members of the SAS. The initial aim was to gather intelligence, but it developed into a more ambitious project to employ former SAS men for paramilitary anti-poaching work throughout Southern Africa, and bought equipment from the South African Defense Force. At least £75,000 of Prince Bernhard’s donation was used to buy rhino horn.” As Ellis added, even then it was no secret that “Many of the ivory and horn traffickers in southern Africa” were “also known to deal in drugs, weapons and ammunition, sometimes with the conivance of senior officers of the South African Defence Force.”
Craig Van Note, executive vice president of the WWF subsidiary TRAFFIC, outlined what WWF already knew in a mid-1988 article for Earth Island Journal. “The South African military,” Van Note charged, “has cynically aided the virtual annihilation of the once great elephant herds of Angola. Jonas Savimbi and his UNITA rebel forces in Angola, largely supplied by South Africa, have killed perhaps 100,000 elephants to help finance the 12-year-old conflict. Most of the tusks have been carried out on South African air transports or trucks, although some move through Zaire and Burundi.”
These freaks will go gaga over Blackwater and Erik Prince if he rebranded to environmentalism and went around killing villagers in the name of protecting unicorns. Liberals decry communists’ jokes about purges while they’re actively cheering on and financially backing vigilante murders by mercenaries.
Most of the people doing it are not some government organization. They’re often ragtag militias or straight up PMCs posing as environmentalists. In Africa particularly, many of these “anti poaching” militias are owned by former Rhodesian officers
You’ll do a lot more to protect the environment by killing coke executives and giving the money to the villagers nearby so they can stop poaching.
That’s not true… the term “terrorism” was originally used to describe the actions of states - it’s only due to the media that, for rather obvious reasons, states have been “absolved” from the vastly greater levels of terrorism they commit in contrast to the comparatively minor levels committed by non-state actors.
So yes, this is terrorism. I’t s not “eco-terrorism” (which is mostly a non-issue invented by the media) - it’s bog-standard, common-or-garden-variety fascist terrorism. The kind the media goes out of it’s way to never call terrorism.
Yeah we have this in South Africa and now some of the “rangers” as you say, are campaigning to sell rhino horn themselves to flood and devalue the market. They say it’s all obtained ethically and all, or captured from the poachers, but I have my doubts.
lemmy.ml
Active