> By 2024, we aim to achieve production-ready status for VM environments on x86-64. > In 2025 and beyond, we will expand our support for CPU architectures and hardware devices.

https://asterinas.github.io/book/kernel/roadmap.html

I haven't tried them out, but usually, awesome-* lists are good starting points.

https://github.com/kr1sp1n/awesome-gemini#services

To me this is by far worst than any potential cancer risk.

(I smoked for 15 years and stopped 3 years ago, if that precision can add any value)

EDT: Juste to add that realizing this gives you motivation when you quit. And the freedom gained is also rewarding.

[0] https://hyperallergic.com/195922/what-happens-when-you-try-t...

This is the only way to make a difference.

To provide a culture access to everyone and not only those with enough money, to bypass censorship and virtual frontiers.

But also to avoid financing distribution companies, that P2P made obsolete. Companies that finance themselves before the tiny subset of compliant artists working for them. The very same companies that make you thing that "sharing is wrong"... Seriously, put this out of context and feel the absurdity of it.

Still though, financing culture still an open problem. For now the only ethical way seems to be the donate buttons and bitcoins.

Special mention to reCaptcha, you just doomed to train there AI and it seems to intensify once you start moving away from google. And I bet it's even worst from the 3rd world...

I guess the "don't be evil" way would be to make all those data public. Or just to provide an alternative way to prove your humanity online, without enslaving the whole world.

  export LS_COLORS='di=01;34m \033'

  sudo !!

So what's wrong with it?

First, things I work on are sold to both sides, in my case to a country well known to shit on human rights... And a few GUI/feature tweak later it's sold to another more respectful one.

Also, in a more general way, the main purpose of it is to kill or fear peoples, peoples with different/unaccepted ideas, peoples who disagree with the weapons owner.

Does it sound right to you?

Of course it's approved by the government, but it sounds way more like a money driven decision than a smart one. And when I ask people how they feel about it, nobody cares, typical responses:

"We are not working on a weapon, we are working on --any subsystem that doesn't sounds like a weapon--"

"I'm not the one who sell it!"

So it's nobodies fault, like during the WW2, "I'm just driving the train, I have nothing to do with deportation"