Because Pollock would smash it with a masterpiece right out of his cellphone? This is cute but not a great device to reveal the truth to the uneducated
I think what he would do is better than what most others would.
This reminds me of something that happened to me in the early 90s. I went to a local computer show (where local distributors would show new hardware) with a friend who's an artist. There was a booth with a color Mac, probably an LC or something like that, running Mac Paint. People were doodling on it, playing around with the spray can and the text tool, and it looked like random stuff thrown on a canvas. Not having a computer at home, my friend was curious, and queued to play with it.
When my friend got a turn on the Mac, first time on a Mac using Mac Paint, he made a drawing that genuinely looked like a piece of art. If there had been a printer nearby, I could have printed it out and put it on my wall, and nobody would have thought that this was a somebody's first time using Mac Paint.
Art is a genuine skill, and you will see the difference between an artist and a random person regardless of the canvas they use.
I guess this also reminds me of the introduction of the Amiga, with Warhol using the paint can to fill in sections of a photo of Debbie Harry. Technically, this is something everybody can do, but Warhol knew which colors to pick, which sections to color, and which choices to make to create something that actually looks great.
Great, so we only want the real high risk takers, the top gamblers,to play in the big league. Those who are so rich they no way to lose their personal comfort and are blind to the personal risk - and probably are careless about anyone's else just as well
Don't we have that already? Bootstrapped startups with the founders money on the line typically don't play in the 'big league's till way after the founder is at risk..
And I prefer cold committee who measure risk and are committed to some public values. You choose silicone valley, VCs and no public healthcare. I prefer the Norwegian model.
That's how it is advertised. But in reality all decisions are made by Google for Chrome and other Chrome forks just implement all of them without questions.
Google wants to add a new protocol - all forks add it. Google wants to cripple adblock support - all forks do it. Etc.
Since the development is done in chromium, adding owners to the project, maybe changing governance similar to Kubernetes and the CNCF, could help steering the anti-trust away and benefit the industry as a side effect.
I tell both my kids "don't stay up too late" just before I go to bed (usually around 11pm). Beyond a certain age you can't force them anymore and they have to learn their limits themselves.
Basketball is a game for tall people. Lifting is a sport for strong people. Chess is a game for smart people. Is that controversial or incompatible with 5 year old kids playing chess?
The difference is that one is immutable and the other is not. One can be rolled back to earlier version while retaining user data and the other doesn't offer that ability.
Despite the name, that's not what immutable distros are for.
GKE won't let yet restore previous generation of configured and component versioned base image.
