I do think it would be awesome if something like offset printing was more accessible. The number of stages/steps for a press that can used for a color or effect is often just limited by floor space. Although some presses can't have an other stage as easily added depending on the manufacture.
Offset printing can have more colors than CYMK. Sometimes a setup will include multiple additional inks beyond CYMK to produce a color or effect that CYMK alone can't produce. Sometimes those colors will be mixed from other colors as well much like paint.
Problem is offset printing presses are HUGE and expensive and require making plates first. There are digital offset presses, but they generally can't have an other stage added like traditional offset printing, it's capped at however many colors that machine has built in. They also are huge compared to other printers people will have at home or the office.
-EDIT-
It is probably possible to scale down the hardware and do something like digital offset presses. I think it would cool if there was a *small* printer people could connect multiple color stages like a legos and mix up a colors for those stages.
I can tell you there are some places people do notice that a screen can't reproduce all the colors they can see.
Anyone who has mixed paint at hardware store or paint store with a modern paint machine will eventually notice this. A of lot them have a spectrometer to match color from a sample. The software often has a preview that appears on a screen of the sample color. That preview color is often not quite the same and it's often either the limit of the sRGB color space or the monitor.
The data from the spectrometers is eventually converted to CIELAB color points with a D65 white point. Then that little preview needs to be converted to sRGB to display it or some colorspace the system supports.
There also some problems with the LAB colorspace, but they are minuet compared tot the limits of sRGB and display hardware.
Not the OP you responded too, but what the hell! I have not really used windows in a while but that's absurd. That text is massive just for an unsigned driver.
I think somewhat sand boxed is fine, but the user should at the end of the day be allowed to let things out or get out if it.
The problem with things like iOS is the user can't make that choice. Also what you call 'bad' is up to the user. At the end of the day a user should be able to adjust things even at root level or request other software to do that on their behalf. Heck for iDevices owners should be able to load their own signing keys at a minimum for the Boot-ROM.
As for Adobe most people would not expect their software to touch the host file, so it's fine to call them out here. Someone using a utility or tool that you would expect to edit the host file that's fine, and people should be able to use or make such a tool. (The os should not prevent the user/owner if that's what they want).
If your worried about acrylamides then you should not be browning any starchy foods. A lot cooking intentionally wants the Maillard reaction for flavor and texture reasons.
When it comes to seasoning carbon steel you should not be letting carbon build up. It's a bad habit. If your getting carbon build up clean it off with something coarse like salt or a metal scrubber. After that if you need to it's not hard to give a pan a quick touch up seasoning with oil. Carbon steel is much quick to touch up season than something like cast iron. Cast irons rough sand cast surface means you generally need a much much thicker seasoning layer.
You also should still clean the pan too! Modern dish washing detergents are generally not made from lye so won't strip your seasoning.
Even with that link I have trouble believing it myself.
Like how was this data/survey gathered/administrated? Sample size ect...
Also I don't understand how sports seem to get so much attention. Like they are just games why?
Another post I was reading a bit ago was how Spain what basically suffering internet outages to stop pirate streams of games on the weekend: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45323856
Like why is a game considered so important that even internet traffic has to suffer. It boggles my mind.
I would say part of it is that ARM never really had wide spread socketed chips. It's pretty much just always a soldered highly integrated unit.
Go go back far enough you had a point in time for example you could swap an Intel or AMD cpu onto the same motherboard. Also using expansion cards for additional hardware capability was the norm. So software kinda evolved to handle disparate configurations of hardware.
ARM evolved differently. It end up being to be used more in embeded and then SoC systems. Hardware around the CPU and later on Die ended up with often a unique configure for the system/device. So the need to handle disparate hardware configurations was less important. Also the way ARM licenses their IP definitely pushed things to be more like this.
RISC-V atm is often being used in place of ARM so a lot entities are kinda are treating similar to ARM when developing a system/device. However, RISC-V since it's an open license on the ISA does not have to be used in similar way. Like imagine if there was some standardized socket for RISC-V chips and that took off, we would probably see things like UEFI and drivers/kernel drivers meant to work with more than just one single configuration of hardware ect...
What I am saying is the way the cryptography is implemented on locked devices such as iPhone your property rights are being trampled upon via cryptography. By using cryptography, the manufacturer reserves for itself; rather than the owner; the fundamental right to exclude or include what software can run on the CPU, even after the hardware is sold. The cryptography is not a legal agreement either like a lease/loan ect... So this being done via extra-legal means.
For example, let’s say you buy an iDevice and do not even intend to run iOS, but instead want to install/port Linux, or run some bare-metal code. You would have to ask apple to sign that code with their private key, which they won't do. The problem is a sale should have transferred all rights of property rights to you as part of the sale. The clue is you have to ask a third party to even hope to do this points to the fact your being limited on the full enjoyment of your property rights. This cryptography is not a contract or legal instrument either and you don't even have to agree to anything for it to be in effect. You could buy the device and have no intention to use the preinstalled software, and it's in effect before you even open the box.
The problem is the right of exclusion is very important, and can even derive most other property rights for example this paper "Property and the Right to Exclude" [https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/33139498.pdf]. The fact such an important property right is being blatantly impeded is the problem.
Okay, but as the owner then I should at the very least be allowed to load my own signing keys for the boot-rom to load other software. Like what if I want to run/port linux to the device. A locked down boot-loader deprives me of full enjoyment of the use of my tangible property.
The owner of a device should have the final say. The way a lot of this is set up basically deprives the owner of one of their core property rights, in particular the right of exclusion. Instead, in many systems the decision about what software to include or exclude is made cryptographically by a third party rather than by the device’s owner. I don’t think we should support limiting people’s property rights for “safety” or other reasons. iOS is probably one the worst in this regard and it sad to see android moving more and more towards this direction.
I have posted multiple times before that this effectively limits people’s property rights. Here are some other posts I have made on the subject:
Well your std c library is generally just a collection of .o, .a, .lib files. So you could use gnu bin tools to remove symbols of your choosing. However good luck getting your system to build software because that would modify the stdlib for all things compiled on your system. You could also tell gcc or clang not to link to the std library and providr your own with just a few switches on invocation of the compiler
How? The preprocessor is ran before every thing else? It will overwrite the defintions in the header just like in the source file? You still would get a linking error. The only reason I couldn think is if the the stdlib headers also called undef for those functions. Moreover this is all during build not runtime.