The US was and probably still is doing the same thing as China with its domestic surveillance programs. They just have a better marketing / PR department about it. But don’t be mistaken, if you speak against this in the US, you’ll commit suicide, or spend the rest of your life in prison or in exile as a traitor.
> They just have a better marketing / PR department about it.
The fact that opposing views could be brought into public discourse, not silenced or censored in QQ or Weibo, makes a huge difference.
It is not just marketing or PR. It is allowing the civil society to take part in public discourse, much like the recent debate on censoring Donald Trump.
> if you speak against this in the US, you’ll commit suicide
No you won't, I've been a loud mouth libertarian (little L) my entire life, I'm still here many years later, I even check my FBI profile every 5 years or so, it's rather dull. US is little league surveillance vs China in terms of consequences. Even Jack Ma couldn't escape their hammer.
When people use BW in their performance models, they don’t use only 1 bandwidth, but whatever combination of bandwidth makes sense for the _memory access pattern_.
So if you are always accessing the same word, the first acces runs at DRAM BW, and subsequent ones at L1 BW, and any meaningful performance model will take that into account.
I use a git repo, markdown documents, and one daemon on each device, to sync and share notes across all my devices.
I have yet to find something that beats this in portability, flexibility, note quality (from markdown to interactive jupyter notebooks), file support (all files), math support (latex formulas for markdown), graph support (mermaid), presentation support (reveal.js),...
Maybe Craft is a little different than a directory tree, since the directories are external to documents, where Craft documents nest internally.
I agree that markdown in a git repo has quite a bit of flexibility. We use git+markdown for my software team's documentation. I prefer Evernote for my personal notes because of less friction when pasting in embedded images and because of better support for editing and offline access from mobile devices (also because of inertia).
> How is the kernel tested ? There weren’t any tests covering any of this ?
Despite appearances, "the kernel" is not a single monolithic thing. There is a about a 100 kloc core (but I haven't looked up that number in years). The rest, hardware drivers, network protocols, file systems, crypto, raid ... bolt on as modules.
Those modules are maintained separate teams. They are as related to the kernel as the phone dialler app is related to Android. The quality of each module is the responsibility of that team, not "the kernel" team. And that applies to testing the module as well.
In a sense, "the kernel" team is more like debian or redhat than developers. What they have done is develop a framework that lets them take bits created and maintained by a cast of thousands, and bolt it together into what appears to be a single coherent thing from the outside. So the answer to "how is the kernel tested" is "it's complex, and not centrally planned".
The other answer is what you are seeing is in fact part of the testing process. Most people use kernels packaged by their distribution. kernel.org releases are more like Microsoft's pre-releases of Windows. Most Debian users for example won't see it until it gets to Debian testing. To get there it must pass through Debian experimental (which is where 5.10 sits now) then sit in Debian unstable without bug reports for a while. Those release names should give you a hint about the anticipated stability of the kernel version. I personally won't use it until it takes another step, which is from Debian testing to Debian backports (which is when it because available to Debian stable users who are willing to risk compatibility issues).
This means that for for most users, 5.10 it's done yet as it has barely begun it's testing regime.
Is this related to newer firmware or so? Because I have a gopro and the usb stream quality is only very low, compared to the HD recording facilities of these devices. If you browse the web for this, you will find (again, as in the threads here) the recommendation to use a HDMI-to-USB converter to capture the high quality HDMI stream a gopro can emit.
