On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 23:02:51 +
Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On 12/31/19, David Niklas wrote:
>
> > Maybe I have not been clear, how does signing an agreement or joining
> > UC "vet" people?
> > I always thought that my code/schematics vetted me as a fool or a wise
> > man.
>
> it's
On 1/1/20, David Niklas wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 23:02:51 +
> Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>> On 12/31/19, David Niklas wrote:
>>
>> > Maybe I have not been clear, how does signing an agreement or joining
>> > UC "vet" people?
>> > I always thought that my code/schematics vetted
On 2020-01-01 22:09, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
the collaboration that is in place, and which is otherwise
successfully taking place, is taking place behind *closed doors*,
where we, as Libre Businesses, are told, basically, "sign this
agreement which entirely compromises your business
Isn't Risc-V supposedly supposed to be more secure and isn't open power
based on the old risc? I am just wondering, if the level of evils risc-v
has done, justifies abandoning usage of it when you could just as easily
do some risc-v processors with or without their help and moreover,
power,
On 1/1/20, Paul Boddie wrote:
> On 2020-01-01 22:09, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
>>
>> the collaboration that is in place, and which is otherwise
>> successfully taking place, is taking place behind *closed doors*,
>> where we, as Libre Businesses, are told, basically, "sign this
>>
On 1/2/20, zap wrote:
> Isn't Risc-V supposedly supposed to be more secure and isn't open power
> based on the old risc? I am just wondering, if the level of evils risc-v
> has done, justifies abandoning usage of it when you could just as easily
> do some risc-v processors with or without their
On 01/01/2020 11:07 PM, Luke Kenneth Casson Leighton wrote:
> On 1/2/20, zap wrote:
>> Isn't Risc-V supposedly supposed to be more secure and isn't open power
>> based on the old risc? I am just wondering, if the level of evils risc-v
>> has done, justifies abandoning usage of it when you