Yeah, that ship has sailed.
Software Engineer, Linux Enthusiast, OpenRGB Developer, and Gamer
Lemmy.today Profile: https://lemmy.today/u/CalcProgrammer1
Yeah, that ship has sailed.
It was mlmym but then mlmym.org shut down. Too bad lemmy.ml doesn’t run it under the old.lemmy.ml like some other instances do. I don’t want to move instances and lose my history to get it back and I don’t want to trust random third party ones. Maybe I should self host it at some point.
Hopefully Qualcomm takes the hint and takes this opportunity to develop a high performance RISC V core. Don’t just give the extortionists more money, break free and use an open standard. Instruction sets shouldn’t even require licensing to begin with if APIs aren’t copyrightable. Why is it OK to make your own implentation of any software API (see Oracle vs. Google on the Java API, Wine implementing the Windows API, etc) but not OK to do the same thing with an instruction set (which is just a hardware API). Why is writing an ARM or x86 emulator fine but not making your own chip? Why are FPGA emulator systems legal if instruction sets are protected? It makes no sense.
The other acceptable outcome here is a Qualcomm vs. ARM lawsuit that sets a precedence that instruction sets are not protected. If they want to copyright their own cores and sell the core design fine, but Qualcomm is making their own in house designs here.