JKSH

You may not care @ShaunR, but I and others do. You favour pragmatism. I understand the appeal and the benefits of a "first interaction support" AI. My concerns center on the long-term, collective social and cognitive side effects of AI dependence and replacing human interactions with AI interactions. (AI can be used well or poorly) Are you interested in exploring this topic further?

Being on-topic is easy for an LLM to achieve. Being useful is harder, and that definitely hasn't been achieved in this case. So it's just time-wasting slop. Probably. Same purpose(s) as all other spambots, just using new tools: Either they will edit their posts later to insert spam links, or they're just vandalizing for the sake of it. That would indeed be putting AI to much better use. This part has harmful side-effects. Software community forums everywhere are shrivelling up, and I bet that one big reason is because people now talk to bots more, and talk to each other less. Sure, this makes answers more readily accessible, but the costs are: The loss of motivation to learn how to ask questions well. The loss of opportunities to share our knowledge with others directly. The loss of human networking in general. These activities have intrinsic social value beyond just acquiring information.

This problem is not unique to mailing lists. Forums, StackOverflow, and official technical support channels still encounter them (although the modern channels do have more tools to deal with them).

IIRC LAVA used to allow it

Then I'm afraid I don't know what's going on.

Try logging in as admin (or use su admin on the terminal)

It feels strange to me too. As I understand it, the "no merge" clause makes libraries legally unusable by others. A quick search reveals that the "no merge" clause is found in numerous different software licenses: https://www.google.com/search?q="merge+the+Software+into+any+other+software" My best guess is that the clause was originally written for standalone applications (meaning that you're meant to run the software as-is, without copying its source code into your own, or linking your own software to its binaries). However, somewhere along the way the clause got copied directly into a library license, without the involvement of a lawyer who understands software licensing. Perhaps @mabe can clarify? He helped at:

Yes you can. The official form is at https://www.ni.com/en/forms/perpetual-software-licenses-labview.html Some things to keep in mind: There is a current promotion (valid till the end of December 2024) where those who used to have an SSP can renew it today as if the SSP never expired in the first place. That means you can get the latest version of LabVIEW, under a perpetual license, at a discounted price (compared to buying it "new"): https://forums.ni.com/t5/LabVIEW/LabVIEW-subscription-model-for-2022/m-p/4398958#M1296289 Quotes/sales are now handled by external distributors, rather than Emerson/NI. Lots of people have reported that they didn't get a response to their quote requests, or didn't get the expected discount applied. If that's the case, message Ahmed Eisawy, the Director of Test Software Commercialization (who wrote the forum post in my link above) and he'll get it sorted out.

I sense a candidate for https://thedailywtf.com/

What communication protocol(s) does your digital X-ray plate use to receive commands and transmit images?

(Not to downplay the importance of standardization, but rather highlighting that it's hard. And as @VDB said the old ones will hang around for a lifetime)

From a console, run ldd on libmain.so. Any missing dependencies?

Your screenshot showed that it's a "USB-9215A" which, according to https://download.ni.com/support/manuals/371568e.pdf, is a USB-9162 + NI-9215 😀 There is the "Reset NI MAX database"... https://knowledge.ni.com/KnowledgeArticleDetails?id=kA00Z000000P8awSAC Beware, this completely wipes your hardware configuration (e.g. any custom Scales, or custom Channels under "Data Neighborhood") so you'll need to reconfigure them afterwards. I'm running out of ideas, I'm afraid. The only other things I can think of trying are: Try an older version of DAQmx (only possible if you're not using LabVIEW 2020), or contact NI tech support.

Congrats! Fancy giving CBOR a go, if you're looking for something to do? It's designed to work well with CoAP. I'd imagine that the API can be modelled closely after Dr Powell's JSONtext.

What happens when you click "Self-Test" instead of "Test Panels..."? Have a look at Windows Device Manager. Any error messages related to your chassis? If you still can't find any clues, contact NI tech support Anyway, I just realized that your 2 machines actually have different hardware. The one that's not working has a USB-9162, not a cDAQ-9171: https://download.ni.com/support/manuals/371568e.pdf