☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to Technology@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 month agoAmerica’s assassination attempt on Huawei is backfiringwww.economist.comexternal-linkmessage-square17fedilinkarrow-up11arrow-down10file-textcross-posted to: technology@lemmygrad.mlworld@lemmy.world
arrow-up11arrow-down1external-linkAmerica’s assassination attempt on Huawei is backfiringwww.economist.com☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.ml to Technology@lemmy.mlEnglish · 1 month agomessage-square17fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: technology@lemmygrad.mlworld@lemmy.world
minus-squareerwan@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 month agoIt’s neither. It’s a specification that you can use to build your own chip. So it’s more like MPEG where you can read the doc and create your own implementation.
minus-squareGolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·edit-21 month agoToo technical; didn’t understand. I prefer RISC-V at this point
minus-squareerwan@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 month agoHow can you have a preference if you don’t understand?
minus-squareGolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 month agoYou didn’t say it’s fully open-source so RISC-V is better no matter how “open” ARM is
minus-squareerwan@lemmy.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up0·1 month agoYes, on the licensing front RISC-V is better.
It’s neither. It’s a specification that you can use to build your own chip.
So it’s more like MPEG where you can read the doc and create your own implementation.
Too technical; didn’t understand. I prefer RISC-V at this point
How can you have a preference if you don’t understand?
You didn’t say it’s fully open-source so RISC-V is better no matter how “open” ARM is
Yes, on the licensing front RISC-V is better.