Maybe this is just my backend/network focus with Golang though. Scaling beyond 10-15k lines of code always was quite intimidating as it is usually where I lose the ability to just keep a model of the codebase fully in my head.

However when I setup Windows it wiped my TPM keys for LUKS so maybe there is a potential conflict there.

But the CEO in the intro just seems like an odd choice. PFAS were known to cause issues for a long time, if you continued to use them for years then it is in your back too.

Being "surprised" this might eventually affect your own product line just seems naive. You might have trusted 3M but just blindly trusting a supplier is not an excuse at some point.

In my setups it just was easier to use fixed paths (or relative to project dir) from a permissions management perspective. Backup tools did not always have to/should run as root which is helpful on machines providing multiple distinct services.

Putting borg or a similar tool in a container that is part of the compose manifest file can also help. I haven't seen this used in practice though yet.

Docker volumes (and bind mounts) however have the minor problem of being hard to get a consistent copy to without stopping the service. You can work around this by, e. G., having ZFS or btrfs as the underlying FS and making a snapshot there. Otherwise, your software (like PostgreSQL) might also have other online backup tooling.

That means they are sometimes economically incentivized to choose an option with lower initial cost but a higher running cost. Governments can/do bend these incentives via taxes but it can be hard/expensive to renovate old complexes (and that part cannot directly be offloaded by the landlord).

One could blame the user for not "just" holding it right. Or alternatively reconsider if the handle should have a grippy coating instead.

(and as a side-note, the in-kernel driver also has some problems. Ime, it sometimes dropped one of my nics for no apparent reason until the next reboot. It is better than the out of tree one though)

There are better learning resources and a better ecosystem available around Nvidia cards & software (cuda).

Long answer, it depends. It will add more challenges and require significantly more effort (even outside the GPU programming itself, debugging toolchain etc. is a somewhat separate skill). The smaller/less mature ecosystem also means you will have less examples to look at for references.

I don't like Anti-Cheat solutions with elevated privileges but they have (at least for some time) reduced the number of Cheaters in games like Valorant or BF, for most users this is at least a somewhat understandable tradeoff. Denuvo on the other hand is DRM and a pure tradeoff in favor of the publisher at the cost of the consumed.

You can read more about it here: https://isabelle.in.tum.de/dist/doc/sledgehammer.pdf