They tried, with the H- and P- lines to effectively make it a paid extra over the regular productions. At least they accepted when the market disagreed.

> This could lead to remote code execution over Bluetooth with no additional execution privileges needed.

[0] https://www.cve.org/CVERecord?id=CVE-2020-0022

With Windows' socket-hogging, its a miracle they can be this invasive and only use that much RAM.

E3SM [0] is still maintained today, and somewhere around 2mil LoC of F90.

Modern Fortran has a lot of niceties that it brings to the table.

[0] https://e3sm.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/DOC/overview | https://github.com/E3SM-Project/E3SM

That's not true. [0]

> On July 25, Ramana Kumar published a repository containing a sorry-free "disproof" of the Collatz conjecture, produced with AI assistance. It is not a valid proof because it exploits a bug in the kernel's handling of nested inductive types.

Even in this dump we're talking about, it hasn't been true. [1]

> In “Algebraicity of Weil classes on split abelian eightfolds” a sign error invalidates a stabilization-trace cancellation argument and the construction used by two dependent papers.

[0] https://leodemoura.github.io/blog/2026-8-24-postmortem-for-t...

[1] https://github.com/openai/math/blob/main/history.md

We don't know the current system can work well enough at this scale, because that's un-knowable. We know it can find some of the problems. We don't know it can find all of them.

We do know it takes more effort - that's knowable. Increased data takes increased processing.

Whether the community has the required effort available, seems unlikely, considering the expertise required to be able to assess these things hasn't changed. Only the ability to generate them has increased.

Where are you getting the 2026 figures from? The Bloomberg article that was "on track to generate" and just prediction?

[0] Australian Government Publishing Service's Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers, ISBN: 978 0 7016 3648 7

[1] The Canadian style: a guide to writing and editing https://archive.org/details/canadianstylegui0000unse

That doesn't seem different to me. Copyright, inherits.

If its fair use, like the companies currently claim, maybe it is different. But I suspect that the insane push to create a copyright carveout in countries around the world, is not unrelated to a judgement that it probably isn't fair use.

I mentioned America, because I'm from Australia, and our two cultures, as often as we interact, do have moments where we fizzle and pop against each other. Calling someone sir or ma'am is a service in America. In Australia, it is liable to piss off the person you're talking to. What one sees as polite, often isn't for the other.

I don't see any snark in what I've said. I see a little frustration, but I don't see any attack on anyone. Which makes it hard to judge, why one thing is acceptable, and another isn't, when they hold the same gravitas and attitude. Again, a "What did I do, exactly?" not a "why are they picking on me".

Is it that snark and sarcasm are synonyms over there? They aren't here. Probably because Australia is a very sarcastic place (e.g. "Yeah, nah").

It it that I didn't add an extra frame, to de-escalate, before saying this was going to cause problems? That is something I often see foreigners feeling the need to do, that just doesn't happen here. If something is crap, we call it crap. Especially if we built it ourselves, and in business communications and court readings as often as face to face.

I already do change my tone on HN, from what works in the home country. Seems I need to change it further.

I didn't add an anecdote for this one, simply because it is well-trodden ground. That businesses run out of Excel, and run into various problems with compatibility, has more blogposts than the site could probably host. It isn't an interesting thing.

The only interesting bit, is that this is going to ruin the days of a few people, and they already know why. My comment was just an invitation to commiserate. Adding more, would direct the conversation more towards those who would criticise and judge the process, without acknowledging the business process is probably not changeable. I don't want to start flames here. I do want to follow the guidelines, because I do agree with them. And if I didn't, I wouldn't be here.

A quote from the Baghavad Gita on this being a bad thing, is fine. But me pointing out all the infrastructure this will likely break, and how, is not?

Is it that I complained in the way I stated something? Because fine, if that's what keeps getting your attention (this isn't the first time), I'll try to Americanise the way I talk here.

We've already got it running on modern hardware. It's running under qemu. And the dBase stuff gets ripped out and sent to a REST server for broad monitoring and so on.

We... Have one small oddity? There's a tape backup system, that throws everything through the soundcard. (Sound Blaster only.)

Would be nice if onboarders didn't see dBase and just throw everything at AI instead of actually learning the skills they'll need when data migrations happen. But that's a people problem that can't be solved with tech.

Pwn2Own was demonstrating no stack as secure back then, too. People were told defense in depth, recovery methods, rapid spin up and lockdown, for the last few decades.