It runs just fine at 165 hz for me. Given that xrandr and CRTs have been around for a while, and both have supported high refresh rates for a long while, something seems fishy here. Something is probably at fault, but it's not X11.
It is able to output the high Hz to the display, but the desktop (like window decorations and window dragging) remains at 60 Hz, it looks like. Individual windows can still successfully render at high Hz. Contrast this with Wayland where I've always seen everything go at the high speed, even if I'm using the same DE in both (like Gnome Wayland and Gnome Xorg on the same hardware).
> Why would a player knowingly choose to play on matchmaking that is advertising no anti-cheat?
My understanding of the proposal is that it advertises no invasive anticheat (meaning mostly rootkit/kernel anticheat). So, the value proposition is anyone who doesn't want a rootkit on their computer. This could be due to anything from security concerns to desiring (more) meaningful ownership of one's devices.
There is a lot of merit to this view, but there is also a major problem: rules like this make it substantially harder to start a new business due to increasing overhead and complexity, which is bad for everyone long term. Such comparatively more complex and burdensome regulation is why so many (but not all) startups go to America or Israel instead of Europe.
To address this I prefer ultra low friction and ultra low cost regulations over complex and performative schemes. For example, GDPR requires the appointment of a "data protection officer" in some cases, which is mostly just an extra fee for small companies. Instead, it should only regulate the rights (such as to be forgotton, etc.). Appointing such an officer is mostly performative.
The most important thing in my view is that both parties are aware of their rights and responsibilities. If the plain text of the warranty agreement specifies replacement, replacement should be required. If the business doesn't want to assume the risk, that's fine, but the warranty should then clearly and explicitly stipulate replacement or refund at the retailer's discretion, in such a way that an average consumer would be expected to see and understand this (i.e., no "replacement" in large, friendly letters and "or refund" buried in fine print or legalese, or leaving out specific details to be filled in by default provisions when such provisions favor the retailer).
I don't think that it's that simple. I'm advocating for regulations to consider the burden on small businesses and aggressively minimize it.
Another example than the GDPR example that I previously gave is beneficial owner registration. The US government tried to pass a law requiring every corporate entity to state who the beneficial owners are, to reduce tax evasion. In principle, this sounds great, but the vast majority of corporate entities are small businesses with natural persons owners, so that beneficial owner is already obvious. So, they should have added such an exception to filing requirements. Even better would be to just work with states to put beneficial owner fields on the existing state incorporation forms, instead of creating a new form, that are optional to fill in when the owner is a natural person. That way, we reduce tax evasion with the better data, but we aren't relying on a random electrician in Ohio or a tech nerd startup founder in California to be aware of these requirements. While one form isn't a big deal on its own, the whole system is like this, and it adds up.
> even a really cool library that makes Rust do this.
The first library that comes to mind when I think of this is `serde` with `#[derive(Serialize, Deserialize)]`, but that gives persistence-format output as you describe is preferable to the former case. I usually use it with JSON.
Maybe a little bit. But serde works with JSON (among other formats), and you can use it to read and write JSON that interoperates with other libraries and languages just fine. Kind of like how SQLAlchemy looks kind of like you’re writing normal Python code, but it interoperates with SQL.
I know "serde" is a take on "codec" but *rewrite* was right there! Also, as long as I'm whinging about naming? 'print' and 'parse' are five letter p words in a bidirectional relationship. Oh! Oh! push, peek, poke, ... pull! It even makes more sense than pop! And it's four letters!
What, exactly, is sandboxed Google play prevented from accessing? Can I feed it a fake location or disable location access? Is it prevented from running in the background 24/7? Can I force it and just it through a VPN? Or is it just blocked from accessing apps and files that aren't in the sandbox? There are many such questions and all could be considered "sandbox".
Sandboxed Google Play receives no special access at all, so you can deny it all permissions if you want, but you should grant network (and maybe notifications) permission for it to actually function.
Well that's a bit misleading answer. Some apps refuse to work if G services are disabled, so they clearly communicate with them. It would be nice to know what exactly G learned about the phone through those "sandboxed" apps.
It's an Android service. But unlike on regular Android where Google play services have hard-coded special permissions, on Graphene it is an ordinary android service with all the same strict rules applying to it, as to any other service you could write.
So an application of course can use other android services if it declared that, that's why it can see whether it's running or not. But you are in full control whether google play services is installed, and what it can use.
Of course this may break certain apps (Google maps location sharing will probably not work with the location permission denied for play services), which may or may not degrade gracefully.
Once this or something like it becomes widespread, won't sophisticated attackers simply test their attacks against this? So, for example, if it checks for `rm` invocations, just implemented the functionally of `rm` in the malware, or if it checks for exfiltration of data, then shell out to curl to do that in a different process.
If you think of making it so robust that this is impossible, you're just describing a container, which we already have.
The container comparison misses where these attacks actually happen. Containers limit what code can do at runtime. We flag what code
intends to do before it ever runs. These are complementary. A container won't stop a postinstall script from reading ~/.ssh/id_rsa and posting it to an
attacker's server if your CI environment has network access and a mounted home directory — which most do.
Yes sophisticated attackers adapt. But the current state of npm supply chain attacks is that most don't even try to evade — because nobody's looking at
the code. Every major attack in 2025 used the same playbook: credential theft + network exfil + install script abuse. Raising the floor from "zero analysis"
to "26 behavioral detectors with cross-signal correlation" eliminates the entire class of low effort attacks and forces the rest into increasingly
constrained patterns.
In response to the seeing like a bank article, one thing which can make this a lot better is to use asynchronous ticketing or messaging systems instead of phone trees.
At my bank, I can just send a message in the app, even when it's closed, about whatever I want. Then, when the bank opens, someone reads it, and then either handles it, or transfers it. Then, if its transferreed, that person either handles it or forwards again.
The same triaging of basic issues exists, the same tiers described in the article, but the user interfece is wildly
superior. I take 1 minute to write what I need to write, and then a few business hours later, its solved. I don't need to waste my time on hold. I don't need to be instantly available for an undetermined period for a call back. I don't need to explain the same issue repeatedly. If I'm asked a question, I can answer it, and the answer is then attached to the full log that every escalation or transfer has full access to.
This is so much better that I refuse to do business with most businesses that don't offer something like this. I was extremely pissed when a data broker leaked my SSN and I was forced to deal with such institutions to clean up that mess.
Apple has an even bigger loyalty problem. For them and Microsoft it's arguably good, but it's bad for users, even the loyal ones. It might even be bad for Apple and Microsoft long term.
I'm not saying Apple can't go the way of Microsoft, but if you've used macOS and Windows through the previous 5 years there isn't much of a comparison. Windows has gone from something I tolerated to something I absolutely dislike using. It's so bad that if it wasn't for WSL then I would consider finding a place to work where they didn't force me to use Windows. MacOS on the other hand hasn't really changed.
The moment someone makes a non macbook air, that does the same as a macbook air in terms of being cold to touch, battery life and no-noise I'm leaving for Linux though.
> The moment someone makes a non macbook air, that does the same as a macbook air in terms of being cold to touch, battery life and no-noise I'm leaving for Linux though.
I think a lot of people are waiting for a non-Apple Macbook, but we unfortunately might be waiting for a while. It seems to pain other manufacturers to not cut corners in some critical area or another…
I have a framework laptop, and when it works it’s just ok. It looks just enough like a Mac to have me feel frustrated when I use it.
In theory we may be able to run Linux (reliably, not in the bleeding edge) on Apple hardware eventually. But you still pay the Apple tax, which is pretty bonkers these days. But dang those machines are nice.
A big issue with Linux has always been the poor battery life management on laptops. So even if a device has a good battery, Linux might not be able to exploit it.
Also the drivers for devices has always been an issue for me. Like there are multiple drivers for the track point, with a million customisation options but no way to get it to work well.
macOS has gotten subtly worse in a "death by a thousand cuts" kind of way. But, nothing like Windows's speed-run to Awful.
Neither OS is empowering me to do what I want to do on my computer anymore. Instead they're constantly nudging me towards doing things Microsoft and Apple want me to do.
Don't you want a Microsoft account? You really should make a Microsoft account. Please make a Microsoft account. We're going to pop up the Microsoft account at you until you say yes. OK, fucker, now you have to make a Microsoft account in order to use your computer.
Sync your stuff to the iCloud! No, really, you're forgetting to use iCloud. Come on, don't you want to use iCloud? We're going to make iCloud the default for saved documents now.
Go ahead and install that app. OK, now go ahead and install it but we're going to warn you that it's from the scary internet. Now, when you install the app, we're going to put a scary dialog if it's not from a developer we're OK with. Now, when you install the app, we're not going to let you even run it until you go into settings and confirm a scary dialog deep in Settings.
I'm not really in the driver's seat anymore. I'm kind of a passenger with limited access to the steering wheel. These are just a few examples but there are plenty of other cases where both Microsoft and Apple are inserting themselves between me and my computer, gatekeeping what I can do on them and treating me like some kind of attacker towards my own computer.
X11 can't do high refresh rates every time that I've tried to do so.
reply