If you are saying that a Windows application cannot tell if virtualization is in use, you are incorrect. It can both tell whether you are in a virtualized instance (e.g. if you have Hyper-V on) and if you are running a hypervisor. In the former case, a simple hardware inspection would suffice, and there are a dozen other methods to tell such as used by virt-what.
None of this is relevant. Maybe Docker's interface is "improperly configured" for the gaming use case. It remains a headache, and using a console is a viable solution that allows you to work with buggy instances of Docker without disrupting your gaming.
If I am understanding correctly, it is an Xbox issue because game systems do not like virtualization / emulation / containerization functionality because of its potential for enabling cheats. Many test proctoring systems are the same way-- the presence of a virtualization service, driver, or hypervisor will trigger a red flag.
So again, for the huge number of people whose life involves technology there are a lot of things that can throw a wrench into that PC for gaming, and in those cases a console makes a lot of sense. It's a little odd to me that this bothers you so much; surely it is expected that consoles have a good usecase given their popularity?
So now the kids need a PC to game, and the parent needs a second PC to game, and I'm wondering how this is more reasonable than a single dedicated appliance that costs less than half of the two PC setup.
I have nephews who are tinkering with Java and python, and I assume will be hitting docker at some point.
You're being incredibly nitpicky over a reasonable example of why PC is not as plug-and-play as a console. On a console, the game will work. On a PC, there are a lot of factors that may prevent it from working.
The entire "use a PC" premise is that the PC can be useful for gaming as well as for non-gaming uses, and the counter-argument is that those non-gaming uses can easily cause problems for the gaming uses. Docker is not the only example, tools like fiddler or wireshark or ghidra could cause problems. But heaven forbid that a gamer on hackernews be a tech enthusiast, right?
>which improves everyone's privacy, that's a good thing!
Except it does not affect Google, because Google has this install ID to use both for tracking and preventing ad-fraud.
Which means Google competitors are terribly disadvantaged, as they cannot use that.
Which not only reduces market diversity (contrary to TAG philosophy) but represents a significant conflict of interest for an organization proposing a major web standard change.
These issues are very relevant to the original proposal, especially in light of the fact that Noone outside of Google is terribly interested in this change. Any time a dominant player is the strongest (or only) advocate for a change that would coincidentally and disproportionately benefit its corporate interests, the proposal should be viewed very skeptically.
None of this is relevant. Maybe Docker's interface is "improperly configured" for the gaming use case. It remains a headache, and using a console is a viable solution that allows you to work with buggy instances of Docker without disrupting your gaming.