Otherwise, you can randomly access any file in a .tar as long as: - the file is seekable/range-addressible - you scan through it and build the file index first, either at runtime or in advance.

Uncompressed .tar is a reasonable choice for this application because the tools to read/write tar files are very standard, the file format is simple and well-documented, and it incurs no computational overhead.

It's debatable whether this is good longterm policy - but it's been the norm in the US for decades.

  - Turn Notepad back into a text editor.
  - Remove ads from your operating system. Yes it feels like a license to print money, but it makes your users hate your product. 
  - Stop charging money for Freecell and Minesweeper.
  - Converge your three control panels back into one. The classic control panel was not broken.
  - Drop the mandatory Microsoft User accounts. Nobody wants this except your bean counters.

I want to add one other note: in any large organization, some developers will use tools in ways nobody can predict. This includes Git. Don't try to force any particular workflow, including mandatory or automatically-enabled hooks.

Instead, put what you want in an optional pre-push hook and also put it into an early CI/CD step for your pull request checker. You'll get the same end result but your fussiest developers will be happier.

Brains can and do make straight-up mistakes all the time. Like "there was a transmission error"-type mistakes. They can't be modeled or predicted, and so humans can never truly be rational actors.

Humans also make irrational decisions all the time based on gut feeling and instinct. Sometimes with reasons that a brain backfills, sometimes not.

People can and do act against the own self interest all the time, and not for "oh, but they actually thought X" reasons. Brains make unexplainable mistakes. Have you ever walked into a room and forgotten what you went in there to do? That state isn't modelable with game theory, and it generalizes to every aspect of human behavior.

  .
  .
  .

But switching to RISC-V would shut Qualcomm out from QNX and would limit its Android compatibility. And on the Qualcomm chips that I've seen so far, they're really bought in on both QNX and Android. That's why I think this is probably an aquihire more than a desire to ship Ventana's CPU cores.

They're more likely to replace the smaller CPU cores imo.

If I were to guess, Qualcomm wants to replace its various Cortex-M cores with RISC-V equivalents. This saves them money on licensing, reduces their dependency on ARM, and doesn't break customer-facing compatibility. Ventana is probably more of an aquihire to get their designer team.

"We will add your biological and technological distinctiveness to our own. Your culture will adapt to service us. Resistance is futile." -Qualcomm, probably

Who benefits from having separate BUs maintain fully separate software stacks? It's duplicated, wasted effort on Qualcomm's part. Maybe it lets them double-charge their customers for this duplicate effort, but that feels short-sighted. It leaves a bad taste in their customers' mouths. And there's certainly no benefit in delivered software quality.

Qualcomm should be making it easy for everybody to buy and use their chips, not artificially segmenting every single customer. They could sweep the market so hard if they were just a little less greedy.