Nvidia doing what Nvidia has always done; proprietary closed drivers. Weird choice to cryptographically protect the power settings. Key problem is that we've allowed a company that's always been this way to form a monopoly. Other brands exist, perhaps it is now worth the effort to migrate and rebuild elsewhere.
New generations such as Blackwell have open source kernel modules, there is not even a proprietary option. I thought there was a move in this direction?
https://developer.nvidia.com/blog/nvidia-transitions-fully-t...
It's not weird at all, they know people will buy these laptops, put linux on them and stash them in data-centers, so they are trying to prevent this.
how are they going to sell you a subscripton to overclock your GPU otherwise?
> we've allowed a company
When did "we" have a say in this? I don't get these types of comments from the "open-source as a community."
Nvidia has been doing this for decades, and there are two possible arguments:
1. They are successful despite it.
2. They are successful because of it.
There is no mythical collective "we" representing the open-source community in Nvidia's supply chain of success. It's Nvidia and its consumers.
> Key problem is that we've allowed a company that's always been this way to form a monopoly.
I don’t think anyone “allowed” them - quite the opposite. They’ve made generational bets that ended up being right, bets that IIRC the industry did not agree with for a long time. Them pursuing CUDA resulted in a draw down of something crazy like 75% of their valuation. They bet the farm multiple times to get to the point they are - and it’s only “obvious” in hindsight.
If you want folks to make generational bets as a matter of course (which I think most folks do), centralizing the downside of those bets and socializing the upside of those bets is not a great strategy. Almost as bad as socializing the downside.
Competition will eventually close that gap. We’re only a few years into this thing.