chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> wrote:
> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > AFAIK, mostly complete systems, directed at the consumer market, for
> >example our HP Pavilion laptops. Higher priced HP laptops, especially
> >the business ones, come with Pro.
> >
> > FWIW, I've yet to miss any functionality in Home.
>
> With Pro, you're not forced to get the Microsoft account.

But one can quite easily install Home without using/needing a
Microsoft account. That's what I did. Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have
changed over time, but there still are several.

And one can get rid of the Microsoft account after the fact and only
use a local account.

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2025-01-02 14:00, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> > Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> >> The bug that finally caused me to stop bothering with them isn't
> >> Microsoft's fault, but I do fault them for continuing to demand TPM when
> >> the requirement was causing stuttering with anyone who owned an AMD
> >> processor. [...]
> >
> > I didn't follow this 'stuttering' problem before, but as I have an AMD
> > processor and - like you - in a laptop [1], can you tell me how/where I
> > would experience said stuttering? So far everything seems to be running
> > fine.
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > [1] HP Pavilion 15-eh2560nd laptop, AMD Ryzen 5 5625U 2.3Ghz 6 Cores,
> > Windows 11 24H2.
>
> An example:
>
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYnRL-x6DVI>

Thankss!

I've never experienced any noticeable video/display stuttering, but
then I don't play games and watch few, but some, videos. OTOH, the
author says "Regardless of what programs I was running.". I assume he
means "Regardless of what *other* programs I was running."

I got my laptop in end of July 2022. Most references are older than
that. Perhaps my laptop was already fixed by HP/AMD.

The video and its notes talk about 'fTPM' ('firmware TPM'). When I run
'tpm.msc' as mentioned in the notes, the 'Trusted Platform Module
Management' plugin only mentions 'TPM', not 'fTPM' anywhere, so perhaps
I *do* have a discrete TPM module.

Anyway, the only specific information reported is:

"TPM Manufacturer Information
Manufacturer Name: AMD
Manufacturer Version: 3.91.2.5
Specification Version: 2.0"

> An acknowledgement from AMD:
>
> <https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-acknowledges-ftpm-stuttering-issues-promises-a-bios-fix-in-may>
>
> I doubt that you never experienced it. However, you might have had it
> fixed if you use a desktop and the manufacturer of your motherboard
> issued an update for the problem.

Thanks again! I thought I didn't download/install any BIOS firmware
update, but on checking my notes, I remembered/saw that there was a
*forced* BIOS upgrade as part of the 12SEP2023 monthly Windows Update
cycle, so perhaps the problem (which I never encountered/noticed) was
fixed at that time.

AFAIC, case closed. But feel free to comment. Thanks.

On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 07:16:32 -0500, Paul wrote:

> My Linux container "ext4.vhdx" is currently 8GB in size.

I haven't fired up a WSL instance in a while but iirc the reported size
seemed to be much larger than what was being used. It worked so I never
dug into it.

On Fri, 1/3/2025 3:24 PM, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Jan 2025 07:16:32 -0500, Paul wrote:
>
>> My Linux container "ext4.vhdx" is currently 8GB in size.
>
> I haven't fired up a WSL instance in a while but iirc the reported size
> seemed to be much larger than what was being used. It worked so I never
> dug into it.
>

From my notes file, and specific for perhaps, a WSL2 install.

optimize-vhd -Path .\ext4.vhdx -Mode full

https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/windows/wsl/disk-space

*******

A number of environments have toolage for this sort of thing.
The most impressive one, was some flavor of VMWare, which
zeros out unused container bits (in the logical sense rather
than the physical sense), then it "compacts" the container as normal.

The more crude procedures, the user is responsible for using
"zerofree" on unmounted partition, or "sdelete64.exe -z" on a drive
letter first, and the compaction tool rebuilds the container,
removing all the zero portions of the partition as it goes.

# Compacting a VHD used under VirtualBox, when VboxManage
# has no support for VHD compaction...
# Zero the white space inside the partition(s) inside the WIN10.vhd first.

diskpart
select vdisk FILE=F:\WIN10.vhd
compact vdisk

*******

Paul

On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:16 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff
>>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this,
>>>> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in
>>>> the posting that started this thread.
>>>
>>> Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive
>>> further updates". It's a corner case ...
>>
>> Which only started happening after a particular update.
>
> ... the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time
> and only in very uncommon scenarios.

Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ?

Hardly worth worrying about, really ...

On 3 Jan 2025 13:47:50 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
> several.

Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
to spare to keep up with all of this, don’t they ...

On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:55 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> You mean, the part that agreed with what I said?
>
> Nope it didn't.

If you cannot make your point clearly, that is your fault, not mine.

Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>On Thu, 1/2/2025 10:37 AM, Joel wrote:
>> "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 19:08:22 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-11,comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>>
>>> OS WAR! <G>
>>
>> I frequently talk to Copilot in a Linux Web app about how sleek Linux
>> is compared to Winblows, and it agrees with me. M$ is laughing at the
>> people using their products on aging hardware.
>
>Exciting I guess.
>
>Session Log:
>
><Joel> Is it snowing where you are ?
><AI> Where am I ? I tried to look at my feet, but I don't have any.
><Joel> I'm 73 years old. How old are you, anyway ?
><AI> I'm either 39 or 93, let me check my coin flipper...
><Joel> So how about that Linux, good or what ?
><AI> Of course, Linux is a toilet paper, which does not scratch your bum [Ref.1]
> [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/bnkct/forget_the_flakes_cola_and_wine_meet_the_linux/
><Joel> Yes, it's very sleek.

That is not remotely like what Copilot and I discuss.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 2025-01-03 16:26, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On 3 Jan 2025 13:47:50 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
>> Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
>> several.
>
> Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
> to spare to keep up with all of this, don’t they ...

Yep, anyone using Windows is very likely to download Rufus and reinstall
to get things working right again, especially since they're not bright
enough to create a bootable Linux USB drive.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

Andrzej Matuch wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
>>> several.
>>
>> Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
>> to spare to keep up with all of this, don’t they ...
>
>Yep, anyone using Windows is very likely to download Rufus and reinstall
>to get things working right again, especially since they're not bright
>enough to create a bootable Linux USB drive.

It's an old story with Windows. For knowledgable users it's not too
bad - they don't make as many mistakes and they have backups if
something goes wrong. However, for the clueless masses that it
purports to serve, it's not so good.

--
"[GNU/Linux users are] still limited by what the developer allows." -
DumFSck, lying shamelessly

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:16 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >>
> >>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff
> >>>>> :-)
> >>>>
> >>>> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this,
> >>>> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in
> >>>> the posting that started this thread.
> >>>
> >>> Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive
> >>> further updates". It's a corner case ...
> >>
> >> Which only started happening after a particular update.
> >
> > ... the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time
> > and only in very uncommon scenarios.

['Convenient' silent snips duly noted.]

> Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ?

I would say much, much fewer, thousands, if that many.

But you, nor I, nor anyone else, are to know, especially not the
uninformed author of your 'alarming' reference.

> Hardly worth worrying about, really ...

Exactly. Glad you finally see the light!

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On 3 Jan 2025 13:47:50 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>
> > Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
> > several.
>
> Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
> to spare to keep up with all of this, don?t they ...

Red herring. Anyway, the typical simple Windows user is not at all
interested in trying to prevent the need for a Microsoft account, so
their time is no issue.

So, try to keep up and try to read from comprehension. This part of
the thread has nothing to do with simple Windows users or their time,
but with the differences between Home and Pro.

Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
> On 2025-01-03 16:26, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> > On 3 Jan 2025 13:47:50 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> >
> >> Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
> >> several.
> >
> > Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
> > to spare to keep up with all of this, don?t they ...
>
> Yep, anyone using Windows is very likely to download Rufus and reinstall
> to get things working right again, especially since they're not bright
> enough to create a bootable Linux USB drive.

No offense, but this part of the thread is not about "to get things
working right again", but about Windows Home versus Pro (started by
questions about the 'Pause updates' setting).

And, as I mentioned, but Lawrence keeps stripping/ignoring, 'we', the
users in the Windows 11 group (and similar groups) have not encountered
the 'can no longer update' 'problem' alleged in the OP, so there is no
need "to get things working right again". That should put things in
perspective, for those who are willing to have an open mind.

It gets quite boring, not to mention pathetic, when people who clearly
do not use the stuff or/and know little about it, vent about all the
terrible things which are allegedly 'wrong' with The Evil OS.

As mentioned before, Windows is not a religion. You don't see 'us'
coming up with all kinds of diatribes about everything 'wrong' about
Linux.

Some of us use both Windows and Linux and 'hence' follow crossposted
threads like this. I have a (professional) Unix/UNIX background and
still use Cygwin's GNU stuff, hence my interest.

Bottom line: Advocacy is fine, zealotry not so much.

On 1/4/25 8:06 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On 3 Jan 2025 10:18:16 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 2 Jan 2025 18:21:11 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 1 Jan 2025 23:59:53 -0500, Paul wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> People here have also achieved that (no updates) by breaking stuff
>>>>>>> :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Microsoft itself has now come up with an update that does this,
>>>>>> too--kills the ability to receive further updates. As I mentioned in
>>>>>> the posting that started this thread.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sigh! It's *not* "an update [which] kills the ability to receive
>>>>> further updates". It's a corner case ...
>>>>
>>>> Which only started happening after a particular update.
>>>
>>> ... the risk of getting the problem existed only for a very short time
>>> and only in very uncommon scenarios.
>
> ['Convenient' silent snips duly noted.]
>
>> Only enough to affect say, a million people, perhaps ... ?
>
> I would say much, much fewer, thousands, if that many.
>
> But you, nor I, nor anyone else, are to know, especially not the
> uninformed author of your 'alarming' reference.

A classical strategy of alarmist trolling is to toss out a seemingly
huge number, but avoid context. Here, the number is one (1) million,
but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users.

>> Hardly worth worrying about, really ...
>
> Exactly. Glad you finally see the light!

Precisely, for even if its ~1M, as a percentage of the 1.6B user bas,
its 1 out of 1600 users = 0.06% - which means ~99.94% were unaffected.

-hh

On 2025-01-04 07:43, chrisv wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch wrote:
>
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>> Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
>>>> several.
>>>
>>> Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
>>> to spare to keep up with all of this, don’t they ...
>>
>> Yep, anyone using Windows is very likely to download Rufus and reinstall
>> to get things working right again, especially since they're not bright
>> enough to create a bootable Linux USB drive.
>
> It's an old story with Windows. For knowledgable users it's not too
> bad - they don't make as many mistakes and they have backups if
> something goes wrong. However, for the clueless masses that it
> purports to serve, it's not so good.

Once that update screws up the system, you or I would be able to restore
it to functionality whether it is with a simple revert to an earlier
time, a configuration change or a reinstall. However, most people
wouldn't know what to do even if those were the only three options on
the screen, they were explained in detail and they had to select one. I
don't like to be pessimistic about the intellect of people, but I can't
help it. Not only do these people disappoint me regularly with their
computer use but I have to participate in teacher meetings where there
are obvious solutions to problems staring at the mass of people right in
the face and they can't figure out what they might be.

--
Andrzej (Andre) Matuch
Telegram: @AndrzejMatuch
Zephyrus G14 GA401QM on Fedora 41
KDE supporting member

On 4 Jan 2025 13:16:18 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 3 Jan 2025 13:47:50 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>> > Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
>> > several.
>>
>> Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental
>> capacity to spare to keep up with all of this, don?t they ...
>
> This part of the thread has nothing to do with simple Windows users or
> their time, but with the differences between Home and Pro.

And how to work around them. Which Dimdows users seem to spend a lot of
their time and effort doing -- trying to counter the platform owner’s
attempts to direct them along lines counter to their own interests.

Which is why they say, Windows is a Great OS -- if your time is worth
nothing.

On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 09:48:23 -0500, -hh wrote:

> Here, the number is one (1) million,
> but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users.

Isn’t it nice to know that you count for less, simply because Dimdows is
so “popular”?

So much for “safety in numbers”, eh? It’s more like “greater danger in
greater numbers”.

On 31/12/2024 19:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> Yet another
> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the
> Windows update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive
> further security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update
> to fix it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
> introducing their own new bugs?

If you read it properly instead of skimming and then rushing to
gleefully spread the news, you'd see that it only applies to those who
installed 24H2 from media (DVD or USB) that has had Windows updates
slipstreamed into it.

Almost nobody does that.

--
Brian Gregory (in England).

On Fri, 1/3/2025 10:18 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>> On 2025-01-02 14:00, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>> Andrzej Matuch <andrzej@matu.ch> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> The bug that finally caused me to stop bothering with them isn't
>>>> Microsoft's fault, but I do fault them for continuing to demand TPM when
>>>> the requirement was causing stuttering with anyone who owned an AMD
>>>> processor. [...]
>>>
>>> I didn't follow this 'stuttering' problem before, but as I have an AMD
>>> processor and - like you - in a laptop [1], can you tell me how/where I
>>> would experience said stuttering? So far everything seems to be running
>>> fine.
>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> [1] HP Pavilion 15-eh2560nd laptop, AMD Ryzen 5 5625U 2.3Ghz 6 Cores,
>>> Windows 11 24H2.
>>
>> An example:
>>
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYnRL-x6DVI>
>
> Thankss!
>
> I've never experienced any noticeable video/display stuttering, but
> then I don't play games and watch few, but some, videos. OTOH, the
> author says "Regardless of what programs I was running.". I assume he
> means "Regardless of what *other* programs I was running."
>
> I got my laptop in end of July 2022. Most references are older than
> that. Perhaps my laptop was already fixed by HP/AMD.
>
> The video and its notes talk about 'fTPM' ('firmware TPM'). When I run
> 'tpm.msc' as mentioned in the notes, the 'Trusted Platform Module
> Management' plugin only mentions 'TPM', not 'fTPM' anywhere, so perhaps
> I *do* have a discrete TPM module.
>
> Anyway, the only specific information reported is:
>
> "TPM Manufacturer Information
> Manufacturer Name: AMD
> Manufacturer Version: 3.91.2.5
> Specification Version: 2.0"
>
>> An acknowledgement from AMD:
>>
>> <https://videocardz.com/newz/amd-acknowledges-ftpm-stuttering-issues-promises-a-bios-fix-in-may>
>>
>> I doubt that you never experienced it. However, you might have had it
>> fixed if you use a desktop and the manufacturer of your motherboard
>> issued an update for the problem.
>
> Thanks again! I thought I didn't download/install any BIOS firmware
> update, but on checking my notes, I remembered/saw that there was a
> *forced* BIOS upgrade as part of the 12SEP2023 monthly Windows Update
> cycle, so perhaps the problem (which I never encountered/noticed) was
> fixed at that time.
>
> AFAIC, case closed. But feel free to comment. Thanks.
>

You could check your BIOS date with CPU-Z .

The other machine, they stopped delivering BIOS updates,
so I'm missing one for security on that machine. The
machine has no TPM and only an fTPM style implementation.

What's strange on the Asus board, is the BIOS file happens
to support around a half-dozen of their machines (design
similarity) and has code for physical TPM detection and use,
yet, there are no pins on the motherboard for a TPM module to
plug into.

All my BIOS have been installed by me.

I don't normally flash BIOS for fun, but I flash in
the security ones.

[Picture]

https://i.postimg.cc/xT5W12yT/BIOS-f-TPM-Five-Fans-machine.gif

Some Windwos things, may involve screwing with MOK or CA stored
in the NVRAM of the UEFI BIOS. On Linux, a boot time utility
(MOKutil?) makes changes to the BIOS info. Microsoft updated some
key thing, to a 2023 date, and the Linux signed shims align
with that same item that was added to the BIOS.

Paul

On Sat, 1/4/2025 8:16 AM, Frank Slootweg wrote:
> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
>> On 3 Jan 2025 13:47:50 GMT, Frank Slootweg wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, the 'holes'/tricks have changed over time, but there still are
>>> several.
>>
>> Naturally your typical Dimdows user has plenty of time and mental capacity
>> to spare to keep up with all of this, don?t they ...
>
> Red herring. Anyway, the typical simple Windows user is not at all
> interested in trying to prevent the need for a Microsoft account, so
> their time is no issue.
>
> So, try to keep up and try to read from comprehension. This part of
> the thread has nothing to do with simple Windows users or their time,
> but with the differences between Home and Pro.
>

The main problem I have with MSA, is recovery from a lost password.

I don't have a smartphone, I don't have all the 2FA materials
to help tech-support-free companies do their thing.

as a consequence, if I were to "lose" a local account on a PC here,
the worst case would be I'd fire up Kali and "crack" the password, for fun.

Paul

On Fri, 1/3/2025 4:48 PM, Joel wrote:
> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>> On Thu, 1/2/2025 10:37 AM, Joel wrote:
>>> "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 19:08:22 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-11,comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>>>
>>>> OS WAR! <G>
>>>
>>> I frequently talk to Copilot in a Linux Web app about how sleek Linux
>>> is compared to Winblows, and it agrees with me. M$ is laughing at the
>>> people using their products on aging hardware.
>>
>> Exciting I guess.
>>
>> Session Log:
>>
>> <Joel> Is it snowing where you are ?
>> <AI> Where am I ? I tried to look at my feet, but I don't have any.
>> <Joel> I'm 73 years old. How old are you, anyway ?
>> <AI> I'm either 39 or 93, let me check my coin flipper...
>> <Joel> So how about that Linux, good or what ?
>> <AI> Of course, Linux is a toilet paper, which does not scratch your bum [Ref.1]
>> [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/bnkct/forget_the_flakes_cola_and_wine_meet_the_linux/
>> <Joel> Yes, it's very sleek.
>
>
> That is not remotely like what Copilot and I discuss.
>

AI do not have human characteristics at the moment.
They don't have ID, ego, or super-ego.
If you tell them "up is down", they will agree with you.

They have settings similar to NN, such as "temperature"
or some annealing property. Beneath all the flowery text,
there are plumbers adjusting the heat and water flow rate.

I managed to "hang" an AI, and it blew past the safety
timer and kept running. Someone at the other end, eventually
killed it (removed the query). And it did not die in the "thinking" phase.
There seems to be some kind of separate "I/O phase",
that generates the text for a text session. And mine
got really really slow while attempting to output some
characters. About one letter every ten seconds.

It's really a mechanical thing, and it's held together
with bailing wire and binder twine. Imagine if it
was self driving your car, and the I/O section went
into a loop and stopped steering the car. That is the
message here. Humans can fail that way too for various
reasons, they just don't do it as often, and with the
same relish for it.

Paul

On 2025-01-05, Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
> On Fri, 1/3/2025 4:48 PM, Joel wrote:
>> Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> wrote:
>>> On Thu, 1/2/2025 10:37 AM, Joel wrote:
>>>> "s|b" <me@privacy.invalid> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 31 Dec 2024 19:08:22 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Newsgroups: alt.comp.os.windows-11,comp.os.linux.advocacy
>>>>>
>>>>> OS WAR! <G>
>>>>
>>>> I frequently talk to Copilot in a Linux Web app about how sleek Linux
>>>> is compared to Winblows, and it agrees with me. M$ is laughing at the
>>>> people using their products on aging hardware.
>>>
>>> Exciting I guess.
>>>
>>> Session Log:
>>>
>>> <Joel> Is it snowing where you are ?
>>> <AI> Where am I ? I tried to look at my feet, but I don't have any.
>>> <Joel> I'm 73 years old. How old are you, anyway ?
>>> <AI> I'm either 39 or 93, let me check my coin flipper...
>>> <Joel> So how about that Linux, good or what ?
>>> <AI> Of course, Linux is a toilet paper, which does not scratch your bum [Ref.1]
>>> [1] https://www.reddit.com/r/linux/comments/bnkct/forget_the_flakes_cola_and_wine_meet_the_linux/
>>> <Joel> Yes, it's very sleek.
>>
>>
>> That is not remotely like what Copilot and I discuss.
>>
>
> AI do not have human characteristics at the moment.
> They don't have ID, ego, or super-ego.
> If you tell them "up is down", they will agree with you.
>
> They have settings similar to NN, such as "temperature"
> or some annealing property. Beneath all the flowery text,
> there are plumbers adjusting the heat and water flow rate.
>
> I managed to "hang" an AI, and it blew past the safety
> timer and kept running. Someone at the other end, eventually
> killed it (removed the query). And it did not die in the "thinking" phase.
> There seems to be some kind of separate "I/O phase",
> that generates the text for a text session. And mine
> got really really slow while attempting to output some
> characters. About one letter every ten seconds.
>
> It's really a mechanical thing, and it's held together
> with bailing wire and binder twine. Imagine if it
> was self driving your car, and the I/O section went
> into a loop and stopped steering the car. That is the
> message here. Humans can fail that way too for various
> reasons, they just don't do it as often, and with the
> same relish for it.
>
> Paul

+1
Excellent poast.

--
pothead

"Give a man a fish and you turn him into a Democrat for life"
"Teach a man to fish and he might become a self-sufficient conservative Republican"
"Don't underestimate Joe's ability to fuck things up,"
--- Barack H. Obama

On 1/4/25 7:28 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 09:48:23 -0500, -hh wrote:
>
>> Here, the number is one (1) million,
>> but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users.
>
> Isn’t it nice to know that you count for less, simply because Dimdows is
> so “popular”?
>
> So much for “safety in numbers”, eh? It’s more like “greater danger in
> greater numbers”.

Nah, that's not how statistics work: the larger the sample size, the
greater the confidence is that a 99.994% reliability assessment is true.

-hh

On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 21:16:52 -0500, -hh wrote:

> On 1/4/25 7:28 PM, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>
>> On Sat, 4 Jan 2025 09:48:23 -0500, -hh wrote:
>>
>>> Here, the number is one (1) million,
>>> but the unmentioned context is out of 1.6 billion MS-Windows users.
>>
>> Isn’t it nice to know that you count for less, simply because Dimdows
>> is so “popular”?
>>
>> So much for “safety in numbers”, eh? It’s more like “greater danger in
>> greater numbers”.
>
> Nah, that's not how statistics work: the larger the sample size, the
> greater the confidence is that a 99.994% reliability assessment is true.

Except, the less the value of such wonderful-sounding numbers.

On Sun, 5 Jan 2025 00:43:07 +0000, Brian Gregory wrote:

> On 31/12/2024 19:08, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> Yet another
>> <https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-windows-11-24h2-bug-could-block-future-security-updates-see-whos-affected/>
>> in the ongoing stream of bugs from Microsoft resulting from the Windows
>> update process itself. This one breaks the ability to receive further
>> security updates. So once you get it, how do you get an update to fix
>> it? Particularly when there have already been updates that kept
>> introducing their own new bugs?
>
> ... you'd see that it only applies to those who
> installed 24H2 from media (DVD or USB) that has had Windows updates
> slipstreamed into it.

Which doesn’t make it any easier to figure out how to fix it, is it?