What I’ve seen of rustdesk so far is that it’s absolutely not even close to the options available for X. It replaces TeamViewer, not thin clients.

You would need the following to get viability in my eyes:

• Multiple users per server (~50 users)
• Enterprise SSO authentication, working kerberos on desktop
• Good and easily deployable native clients for Windows, Linux and Mac, plus html5 client
• Performant headless software rendered desktops
• GPU acceleration possible but not required
• Clustering, HA control plane, load balancing
• Configuration management available

This isn’t even an edge case. Current and upcoming regulations on information security drags the entire industry this way. Medical, research, defence, banking, basically every regulated landscape gets easier to work in when going down this route. Close to zero worries about endpoint security. Microsoft is working hard on this. It’s easy to do with X. And the best thing on Wayland is RustDesk? As stated earlier, these issues were brought up and discarded as FUD in 2008, and here we are.

Wayland isn’t a better replacement, after 15 years it’s still not a replacement. The Wayland implementations certainly haven’t been rushed, but the architecture was. At this point, fucking Arcan will be viable before Wayland.

Exactly my point. The issues people consider ”solved” with wayland today will be solved in production in 3-5 years.

People are still running RHEL 7, and Wayland in RHEL 9 isn’t that polished. In 4-5 years when RHEL 10 lands, it might start to be usable. Oh right, then we need another few years for vendors to port garbage software that’s absolutely mission critical and barely works on Xorg, sure as fuck won’t work in xwayland. I’m betting several large RHEL-clients will either remain on RHEL8 far past EOL or just switch to alternative distros.

Basically, Xorg might be dead, but in some (paying commercial) contexts, Wayland won’t be a viable option within the next 5-10 years.

Yeah, the few thousand users I managed desktops for will remain on X for the next few years last I heard from my old colleagues.

Because of my points above

But good that your laptop works now and that I can help my grandma over teamviewer again.

Please note that the nominal FLOP/s from both Nvidia and Huawei are kinda bullshit. What precision we run at greatly affect that number. Nvidias marketing nowadays refer to fp4 tensor operations. Traditionally, FLOP/s are measured with fp64 matrix-matrix multiplication. That’s a lot more bits per FLOP.

Also, that GPU-GPU bandwidth is kinda shit compared to Nvidias marketing numbers if I’m parsing correctly (NVLink is 18x 10GB/s links per GPU, big ’B’ in GB). I might read the numbers incorrectly, but anyway. How and if they manage multi-GPU cache coherency will be interesting to see. Nvidia and AMD both do (to varying degrees) have cache coherency in those settings. Developer experience matters…

Now, the real interesting thing is power draw, density and price. Power draw and price obviously influence TCO. On 7nm, I guess the power bill won’t be very fun to read, but that’s just a guess. The density influences network options - are DAC-cables viable at all, or is it (more expensive) optical all the way?

There is actually less to ’xkill’. It nukes the X window from orbit in a very violent manner. The owning process(-tree) will usually just instantly curl up and die.

The main benefit is that it doesn’t actually kill the process, it only nukes the window. As such, you can get rid of windows belonging to otherwise unkillable processes (zombies, etc).

Also, it’s fun. Just don’t miss the window and accidentally kill your WM. (Beat that Wayland)

Tony Stark was able to build his CA in a cave! With a bunch of dice!

This will be so much fun for people with legacy systems

Now consider that most enterprises are about five years behind that. Takes a few years before what’s available in Fedora trickles down to RHEL, and a few more years before it’s rolled out to clients. Ubuntu is on a similar timeline.

The fixes you got two years ago might be rolled out in 3 years in these places. Oh, and these are the people forking up much of the money for the Wayland development efforts. The current state of Wayland if you pay for it is kinda meh.

I’ll bite. It’s getting better, but still a long way to go.

• No commercially viable remote desktop or thin client solutions. I’m not talking about just VNC, take a look at for example ThinLinc to see what I’m looking for - a complete solution. (Also, it took like ten rough years before basic unencrypted single user VNC was available at all.) Free multimillion dollar business idea right here folks!
• Related to the above point - software rendered wayland is painful. To experience this yourselves, install any distro in VirtualBox or VMWare or whatever and compare the usability between a Xorg DE (with compositing turned off) and the same Wayland DE. Just look at the click-to-photon latency and weep. I’ve seen X11 perform better with VNC over WAN.
• ”We don’t need network transparency, VNC will save us”. See points above.
• ”Every frame is perfect” went just as well as can be expected, there is a reason VSYNC is an option in games and professional graphics applications. Thanks Valve.
• I’m assuming wlroots still won’t work on Nvidia, and that the Gnome/KDE implementations are still a hodgepodge, and that Nvidia will still ask me to install the supported Xorg drivers. If I’m wrong, it only took a decade or so to get a desktop working on hardware from the dominant GPU vendor. (Tangentially related - historically the only vendor with product lines specifically for serving GPU-accelerated desktops to thin clients)
• After over a decade of struggles, we can finally (mostly) share out screens in Zoom. Or so I’m told.

But what do I know, I’ve only deployed and managed desktop linux for a few thousand people. People were screaming about these design flaws back in 2008 when this all started. The criticisms above were known and dismissed as FUD, and here we are. A few architectural changes back then, and we could have done this migration a decade faster. Just imagine, screen sharing during the pandemic!

As an example, see Arcan, a small research project with an impressively large subset of features from both X11 and Wayland (including working screen sharing, network transparency and a functioning security model). I wouldn’t use it in production, but if it was more than one guy in a basement working on it, it would probably be very usable fairly fast, compared to the decade and half that RedHat and friends have poured into Wayland thus far. Using a good architecture from the start would have done wonders. And Wayland isn’t even close to a good architecture. It’s just what we have to work with now.

Hopefully Xorg can die at some point, a decade or so from now. I’m just glad I don’t work with desktops anymore, the swap to Wayland will be painful for a lot of organisations.

Rough start? It’s been over a decade and it’s still rough.

Biomedical AI literally won the Nobel prize last year. But LLMs won’t help at all.

Tangentially related, any biomedical outfit that hasn’t bought a shitton of GPUs to run alphafold on is probably mismanaging money.

You have FreeIPA if you want a ”product”.

But honestly, if I, as a Linux admin, would do this kind of thing at this scale, I’d probably elect to remain on AD.

Here be dragons. But basically:

• Run a VM from contents of a physical disk: use ’dd’ to create disk image. If on linux, try to boot and fix all the errors, hopefully few.

• Run VM as physical machine: other way around.

You won’t find this in a tutorial. You need to understand concepts, read manuals, fit everything together, execute, fail and retry until it works.

For Windows, I have no idea. Conceptually, I figure it’s similar.

You mean a transparency log? Just sign and publish. Or if it’s confidential, have a timestamp authority sign it, but what’s the point of a confidential blockchain? Sure, we han have a string of hashes chained together á la git, but that’s just an implementation detail. Where does the trust come from, who does the audit? That’s the interesting part.

If your blockchain isn’t distributed, it doesn’t need to be a blockchain, because then you already have trust established.

Git gud

/s

Stability and standardisation within the kernel for kernel modules. There are plenty of commercial products that use proprietary kernel modules that basically only work on a very specific kernel version, preventing upgrades.

Or they could just open source and inline their garbage kernel modules…

Document databases are the future /s

Or you know, trusted timestamps and cryptographic signatures via normal PKI. A Merkle tree isn’t worth shit legally if you can’t verify it against a trust outside of the tree.

All of the blockchain bullshit miss that part - you can create a cryptographic representation of money or contracts, but you can’t actually enforce, verify or trust anything in the real world without intermediaries. On the other hand, I can trust a certificate from a CA because there are verifiable actual real-world consequences for someone if that CA breaks legal agreements.

I’ll use a folder of actual papers, signed using a pen. Have some witnesses, make sure they have a legal stake and consequences, and you are golden.

Distributed blockchains are useful when all of the below are fulfilled:

• Need for distributed ledger
• Peers are adversarial w.r.t. contents of transactions in the ledger
• Enough peers exist so that no group can become a majority and thus assume control
• No trusted central authority exists

Here, we have a single peer creating entries in a ledger. We can get away with a copy of the ledger and one or more trusted timestamping authorities.