mindlight

No.

That was easy.

Shortly as in?

Microsoft has no choice.

Arm has been dominating the biggest growing market mobile (everything from phones to tablets and now). Intel is fighting a three front war now. While one battlefront is the mobile market where ARM essentially is the only choice, another battlefront is dominated by Nvidia with the processors for graphics and ML/AI. If that wasn't bad enough, AMD is attacking hard on Intel's home arena: PC CPUs.

When Apple dropped Intel for M1 they showed that Arm wasn't just some niche processor technology for less powerful devices, such as mobile devices.

So not only is AMD taking market shares in the PC market, ARM is on the rise and doesn't look very good for Intel right now.

Is Intel really capable of innovating their way out of their current path to extinction?

You make it sound like corporations invent a new revolutionary wheel each quarter. They don't.

What fantastic new beverage have Coca Cola launched the last couple of years? What astonishing new car technology has GM or Volkswagen released lately?

Most companies are doing what they've always have done and guarding their market share. Now and then some small competitor with something revolutionizing pops up and either starts eating market share it gets aquired by one the bigger ones.

So between a competition popping up or one of your engineers coming up with a lucky accident, all you do is to manage the business as you always do.

No. Middle management is a lot of repeating tasks that an AI could do. The thing is that were not talking about replacing all middle management, we're talking about giving 10% of the managers the tools to run 90% of the repetitive, tedious and boring tasks.

Yes. And it will.

I actually have no idea who sold what in this case and it's actually not even remotely relevant since the discussion was about updating the Geneva convention and who wouldn't sign.

However, you seem to imply that Israel lacks the knowledge and resources to create the Lavender system themselves. Intriguing! Please elaborate with some links supporting your claims.

Even if you got US and Israel to sign it, Russia, China and The Saudis would never.

Yeah. Maybe aim for something that at least has a chance to become a law?

Might be your ideal world but that will not happen. The only reason Android is "open" is because Google wanted to hit Microsoft and Apple where it hurts. If they were super pro open source they would have released all code for Okay Services and the hardware in Nexus and Pixel.

But they didn't... So... Yeah... Not even Google is sharing your vision.

I'm pretty sure that looks better on paper than it will do in the real world. Today a lot of software libraries are incorporated into applications. These libraries solve specific problems that the vendor didn't have to solve themselves. Often these libraries are licensed to be used under specific circumstances. Even if you would get your hands on the source code, you are certainly not allowed to declare it open source.

So even if Sony were to release the OS on the Bravia as open source, it would most likely be a Swiss cheese with holes that had to be fixed before it was usable.

At that point you still wouldn't have gained much from an end user perspective since there is still no app store. Even if you set up your own local app store you would have to convince Netflix and other streaming services to release a client app for your tv.

I think the solution is more in the direction of legal pressure. If you sell something, it should be expected that you honor that sale and not change it to something it wasn't when you happily accepted the money.