Re: Oh Gods - Now MX Linux "Security Verification" - NO !!!

On 8/23/26 07:46, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
> On 23/08/2026 07:57, c186282 wrote:
>> On 8/22/26 18:35, Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
>>> On Sat, 22 Aug 2026 08:36:42 -0400, TJ wrote:
>>>
>>>> It goes against the grain, for me at least, to send perfectly good
>>>> running hardware off to the recycler, just because it is
>>>> "experienced."
>>>
>>> CPU generations (and entire architectures) get dropped from the Linux
>>> kernel because they can’t find anybody to step forward and maintain
>>> the support for them.
>>>
>>> That is how they tell that there are so few instances of those
>>> particular kinds of hardware around, that essentially nobody cares
>>> about them any more.
>>
>>    Sad, but quite correct.
>>
>>    Really not much call to run Linux-ish stuff
>>    on a 386/486 these days. How many people
>>    still USE those old boards for ANYTHING ?
>>
> Not many. Some retro computer people keep them alive for interest, 
> running the original OSs
>   Some are in embedded applications still running DIS with turbopascal 
> apps in them and no networking at all


   I made an old 386 PC-104 board run a semi-complex
   machine. In my case the machine became obsolete
   before the board died - but that won't always be
   true for everybody. Huge $$$ might be lost.

   Yep, the software COULD pretty easily be moved to
   some new/modern board/language. Python on a PI
   or BBB would have served. But who DOES that ?

   A 'perception of rarity' has been cultivated,
   like only on in a billion can translate the
   sense of an old process-control system to
   anything newer. Thus the PRICE of doing so
   becomes prohibitive.


>>    MAYBE a few "industrial" monitor/control
>>    systems ... but REALLY they oughtta upgrade.
>>
> If running well leave well alone.

   BUT ... if yer highly-profitable machine running
   on the old board STOPS WORKING because the ancient
   board has died then you LOSE $$$$$$ !

   As such, there may indeed be a motive to upgrade
   periodically. Even an Ard2560 or BBB or PI, with
   a hat or two, could do everything that PC-104
   was doing. The hardware is CHEAP. It's the effort
   to move the practical sensibility of the old
   software over to a new system/lang. You'll get
   RIPPED OFF for that now (unless you have an
   in-house geek).

>>    However SOME won't because it might cost a
>>    few dollars. They'll run the old hardware
>>    until it literally bursts into flames - and
>>    then be SCREWED for days/weeks/months. But,
>>    the bean-counters will TELL them they're
>>    saving SO much money, now .......
>>
> Any sane business is run on cost benefit lines. As kit gets older the 
> cost of maintaining it starts to rise, but the cost of replacing it also 
> starts to be considered.

   Sounds so reasonable ... but, depending, such delays
   might cost you yer entire biz. If YOU suddenly can't
   make Polyvinyl Acetate then everybody will shift over
   to some OTHER maker - and probably stick with them.

   Bean-counters should NEVER run a business.

> At a given point you start allocating budget for inevitable replacement, 
> get someone in to replicate the old code, run the systems in parallel 
> and then once everything is hunky dory (that's English for copacetic) 
> you switch the old system off.
> 
> You might then store it a couple of years in case the new one has issues.
> 
>>    There was a case a few years back, Paris airport.
>>    Suddenly the entire ground-control system went
>>    down hard. Soon found, it had been running on
>>    a Win-98 box for MANY years. Since it worked
>>    nobody bothered at looking to modernize. Not
>>    spending $10,000 probably cost them $10,000,000 :-)
>>
>>    Now here is a case where a properly tuned "AI"
>>    just MIGHT be of good use. Calculate and do what
>>    the humans don't want to do anymore. What IS
>>    involved in making an old app work on a 20 year
>>    newer board ? Humans CAN do it - but don't WANT
>>    to do it. The "AI"s don't care about any of that
>>    and WILL offer/script solutions.
>>
> Big companies stumble on from crisis to crisis. Crises that would break 
> a smaller one. Because big companies get infested with gold diggers, 
> status seekers,  arse coverers and dead wood.
> 
> The system carries them, until it doesn't

   Yep ... Until It Doesn't.

   Oh well, the high-ups get their golden parachutes
   and WHO CARES about anyone/anything else eh ?  :-)

   According to Machiavelli, the 'golden parachute'
   idea was born in old Rome. By insulating the
   high-up generals and such from the consequences
   of failure such individuals could afford to
   be BOLD. Apparently this tended to pay off on
   average.

   But SHOULD it be applied to mere "business" ?