Provided compliance is nuts, this man is a nutcase for complying. Sounds all good, but I dont believe being a nutcase warrants doxxing, verbal harassment, verbal threatening, and everything else that we’re seeing here.

Real quick, does anyone want this? It’s another competitor in a rather centralized market, so it’s good we’re seeing some adequate competition, but the product they’re pushing is designed specifically for “AI and cloud workloads”. Their marketing towards datacenters seems to indicate the AI focus, but at the expense of performance to non-AI applications. In a nutshell, I do believe it’ll excel with AI, but “Cloud workflows” sounds like marketing lingo for “Lol this CPU can’t handle heavy tasks.”

Yeah, it’s all speculation from me here, but if manufacturers are pressured to drop AMD for Nvidia’s CPUs, this seriously looks like the first significant push to a standard where your computer only exists to access a server, where you don’t own your own services.

As far as my applications for open-sourcing goes, AI has actually done a good number on assisting it.

I’m a DIY sort of person, and use a lot of software for things like ESP32 boards to complete niche tasks. The problem is that very many applications just didn’t have some preexisting code made for it, so it took a much larger load for me to try programming it by hand. In recent years, I’ve had a much easier time finding software for things, and sure enough, many of these projects have some mention or disclaimer about AI.

I know AI brings its own problems with it, namely that of code produced with lesser-optimized techniques, but the alternative I had to deal with was simply no premade code at all.

That being said, many of these projects did die out after AI was implemented, but not because the community was less interested, or the developers were less caring. These projects died because they reached their end goal, they did exactly what you needed it to do, no more or less. Far as I’m aware, that sounds like a successful outcome.