Sauron

The only devices that are too thin for USB-A are smartphones and tablets, which generally use wireless peripherals anyway. And still, I would not want a phone without a headphone jack (which fits just fine). Virtually all laptops can easily fit USB-A ports and making one so thin that a USB-A wouldn't fit would be a bad idea for structural and ergonomic reasons. USB-A is extremely cheap to add and many laptops could easily fit way more than they do now with no real drawbacks. Again you can't do this because USB-C is so poorly defined. Even if two devices come with USB-C they're not guaranteed to work with each other - even the cable is not guaranteed to work even if both devices are theoretically compatible. In my opinion this was a huge mistake by the consortium and it's one of the main reasons USB-C never took off as a one-port-fits all solution. Not to mention monitors and wired networking.

You might be right if any device came with USB-C. Instead the vast majority include USB-C as an afterthought, if at all. It's hard to blame them when the standard is such a mess; you can't rely on a USB-C port to support video out, network, thunderbolt, high power charging or even good old usb because all of these are optional in the standard. It's also an inferior connector in many ways compared to its purpose built competitors because trying to make a jack of all trades inevitably results in drawbacks. Nobody is using USB-C for serious networking, for example; few monitors support it and most just come with the ubiquitous displayport and/or HDMI. Even if every single device had USB-C, going with only one or two ports would mean instantly running out and needing a dongle anyway just to plug in your headphones and mouse while charging. Yeah as per usual they give the "1 petaflops!!!" headline without specifying it's FP4, but we all know at this point

You're misunderstanding the dynamic. They wanted to lay people off to begin with and they used AI as an excuse. There is no evidence that the people being laid off are being "replaced by AI" or were made unnecessary due to other people using AI to be more productive. It fits in a broader trend of tech layoffs designed primarily to show savings for investors in companies that likely overhired when they predicted more growth than actually materialized after covid.

In normal operation nothing will happen to your drives I mean you don't need to do either, it's just a precaution to avoid making mistakes. Disabling it in the BIOS should be sufficient for that.

Well, Linux will overwrite your boot partition if you tell it to, the only difference is that Grub (and other Linux bootloaders) will recognize Windows installations while the Windows bootloader will not recognize Linux. Personally I prefer using separate drives when dual booting. It can't happen "randomly" but you can absolutely make a mistake. Many installers will detect windows and show you which drive it's on so it's harder to select it unintentionally. This is more or less the same when installing windows for that matter, though dual booting different Windows versions is quite rare nowadays.

The only thing I can think of is trying a reboot to make sure the environment variables are set correctly, otherwise I'm out of ideas

have you selected it as the default java runtime? https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/installing-java/#_switching_between_java_versions

you should try java *17* since 18 is included in the versions that might have issues

Which version of Java did you install? Apparently Java >18 can cause issues: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Blu-ray#Blu-ray_menus_do_not_load_with_"Failed_to_start_bluray_playback._Please_try_without_menu_support." You can find instructions on switching to an older Java version on Fedora here: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/quick-docs/installing-java/#_installing_an_older_java_version

Except spacex is not nvidia, any compute they could rent would have to first be purchased from nvidia, then sent to space (for no reason) and rented out to... whom exactly? Certainly not all businesses on Earth; possibly some of their own AI competitors, none of whom are making any money either. Either way the release quite explicitly talks about "AI market" so you're stretching what they said quite a bit to make it sound reasonable and it still isn't. You could make the cost of the rocket 0 and still not be competitive with just having the GPU sit in a data center. If the argument is regulation, don't you think governments that dislike data center pollution would also not be OK with wasting tons and tons of rocket fuel and the associated emissions and, eventually, regulate those as well? And all of this is based on generous numbers you're just assuming will be a reality rather than anything they have to show right now.

Corporate PR never needed LLMs to produce inane nonsense Not only that, the idea that all businesses on earth are an accessible market to them is like saying a bottled water company has an addressable market of the entire world economy because everyone drinks water. Even if we accept all these businesses need and will pay generously for "AI", there's no reason to assume they'll all go to xAI. Heck, the vast majority of these insane numbers are based on projected revenue from AI. So far, not a single one of these AI companies has ever turned a profit from AI services. Basing their infrastructure in space seems like a great way to increase costs for no reason, regardless of actual feasibility it will never be more efficient to run GPUs in space compared to Earth. So why are you so caught up in running exact numbers? Who cares? It obviously makes no sense for a number of different reasons and it makes the entire statement a lie, no matter precisely how stupid it is. Can they put a GPU in space? Sure, probably. Can it ever be more cost effective than a GPU in a server rack? Absolutely not.

it's not like they asked us... this was pretty much the norm until a few years ago anyway, I wasn't going to buy a playstation then and I'm not going to now (not a new one at least - I might get a used one at some point but sony doesn't make any money from that sale anyway). who cares? if they can't offer a compelling product let them fail, same for sony.

utter bullshit but it's not like the stock market has any relationship with reality anyway

It could be it causes a reboot on your system, ot you there could be something unrelated causing the reboots, in which case the dmesg output isn't relevant unfortunately

following the link for the gitlab issue page I found a report discussing your exact issue with your exact gpu: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/drm/amd/-/work_items/5307 Should be fixed in the upcoming 7.1 kernel.