Lowkeyloki

I wish the latest release wasn't from two years ago. And that it wasn't based on webkit.

People in the replies are missing my point. It's not that Tumblr's content is porn or that Tumblr is associated with porn _right now_. It's that Tumblr will absolutely be associated with porn if a porn company buys it. And these various companies will abandon ship in order to avoid association with a porn company.

What's wrong with "BeautifulSoup"? Is it a euphemism for another term with the initials "BS"?

It's cringy because it's unprofessional and amateurish. Not to mention that you only have a certain amount of control over your content and hence your SEO.

For example, how would you like it if "beyoncescock" or "dildoreo" (both real usernames, by the way) were to reblog your serious announcement from your serious company? Now those usernames are associated with your company's name when you search for it on the web.

My point is not that Tumblr is necessarily all porn in terms of content. It's that if it's owned by a porn company, other companies wouldn't want to be associated with it.

I was discussing companies who use Tumblr for official communication, like System76 and NPM, on another story earlier this week, and how it's cringy and not a good look IMHO. (My comment was flagged for some reason despite having 5 points and 8 replies. How does this site work?)

I hope PornHub does buy Tumblr! Can you imagine how quickly all the corporate blogs would scramble off of the platform to avoid association with a porn site!?

I was discussing companies who use Tumblr for official communication, like System76 and NPM, on another story earlier this week, and how it's cringy and not a good look IMHO. (My comment was flagged for some reason despite having 5 points and 8 replies. How does this site work?)

I also heard the rumor that PornHub was interested in buying it. I hope they do! Can you imagine how quickly all the corporate blogs would scramble off of the platform to avoid association with a porn site!?

Sounds like an epic adventure to me.

It's long been a dream of mine to make some software package that would be immensely useful and offer it for free with the catch being that the name is something childish and embarrassing and offensive.

And then maybe offer a version of it with a nice, normal, appropriate name, but charge money for that version.

I wouldn't use these fonts in documentation or on a blog. But I love them in my editor, where only I need to understand the difference between the literal characters and those tasty ligatures.

That hasn't been my experience in a decade in the industry. I've never worked at a company with a single person who has worked at any of the big silicon valley tech companies. But I've seen people choose technologies, tools, designs, and processes because that's what company X uses. None of the companies I've worked at have been even a tenth of the size of Google or Facebook. None of the companies has had one one hundredth of the amount of activity in their repositories that you'd find in the Linux kernel.

Is anyone using it on the daily? How does it diverge from git?

I want so much to like Fossil. But I feel like it's too closely tailored to Dwayne Hipp's workflow.

I'm also not so hot on the jack of all trades approach of the built-in issue tracker, wiki, etc. It goes against my Unix philosophy sensibilities. But that's just my 2¢.

Git made some design decisions that sacrifice usability for speed when you're dealing with a gigantic repository on the scale of the Linux kernel, which is what it was designed for.

I believe that git won out over mercurial for the same reason that small start ups choose systems and processes that are the same as those used by big players like Google, Facebook, Amazon, etc.

People should try to make design decisions and choose tools for the scale they're actually at. Not the scale they hope to be at some day.

Mercurial's interface makes more sense if you're migrating from a svn workflow, for example.

I didn't realize this was ever a trend. I'm glad it died.

This is cool and all, but I can't help but cringe when I see a corporate entity using Tumblr for official communication.

I actually enjoy having choices. That's part of why systemd's feature creep to swallow everything bothers me. It represents choice being taken away from the administrator of the system.

What about people who already bought it? Does it stay installed on their consoles? And if they uninstall it, can they download it again?

It's probably moot because I'd expect Nintendo to demand a patched version of the game with Ruby removed to replace the existing version for those who bought it even if Nintendo decides not to allow it up on the store again.

Hats off to the author! This is an incredible story and you're made of stronger stuff than I. I'd be too afraid of the consequences of screwing up to attempt something like this.

Everything the author and the commentors here have said is completely legit. I'm not looking to start a war. And I completely acknowledge that what I'm about to say might be wrong as I haven't seen the author's code or the code of wlroots.

But I have to wonder if the design decisions of wlroots itself may be dubious. If it's this hard to manage memory safely when you're trying to wrap the API in a language that demands you're kept accountable for memory safety....

I'm a chronic wheel reinventor. If you're trying to make money off of your project, your mileage may vary. However, I've found that there are plenty of good reasons to reinvent the wheel. Although I'd very rarely reinvent the wheel when I'm doing something for pay as that implies issues like deadlines and maintainability, I do it all the time for personal projects.

Professionally, I'll write only the code that I feel comfortable that I understand and can maintain. Otherwise, I'll look to third party open source code. Unfortunately, I have been bitten a few times recently by popular and well-maintained but poorly designed or tested libraries that include frustrating bugs.

In my personal projects, I like to challenge myself. I will choose to write any and all code that isn't provided by the language's standard library even if trustworthy open source libraries exist that I would use in a professional situation. I like to think of it as "desert island programming". If nothing else, it has taught me interesting things about all sorts of domains I wouldn't have otherwise sought to learn about. And that knowledge is worth the struggle when making it to market as fast as possible isn't the goal.

There are other reasons for reinventing the wheel besides supplementing your personal understanding. Sometimes the licenses of the alternatives are inadequate. Of course, that's a somewhat personal assessment. Sometimes the alternatives are poorly maintained, poorly designed, or have fundamental flaws or bugs. Sometimes it's not that the existing software is bad per se. Oftentimes writing software involves trade-offs and perhaps the trade-offs the major library's authors have chosen are different from what you might choose. Recreating it yourself can clue you in to these trade-offs and gives you the opportunity to explore different paths.

I feel bad because it's my understanding that the recording was 100% human. My comments could be taken as an insult to the voice actor.

That's what I was afraid of. Thank you, though. I do feel super bad about it now.

Did anyone else listen to the audio version of this article? Is it a really good text-to-speech engine reading it, or is it a real person? I feel a little bad asking because I'm probably insulting a real VO artist by asking.

The reasons I suspect that it's a machine are:

1. The voice sounds really familiar.

2. The person (or machine, but henceforth I'll just say person) read the names of the authors but never gave his own name.

3. The person had unusually long but consistent pauses between sentences.

4. The person read a few clauses strangely in a way that I don't think a real person, or at least a native English speaker, would have. The clauses were a little strangely worded, but the intent becomes clear as soon as you read the whole sentence. So although it's not impossible that a real person and native speaker would have gotten it wrong, they would have immediately reread the sentence with the correct inflection.

5. I can't imagine a real person reading such an emotional piece in such an unaffected manner.

All that said, if it is text-to-speech, it's the best I've ever heard. But you can see how I feel bad about saying all this. It implies this is either a fantastic text-to-speech program or a questionable VO artist. If this was a real person and that person is reading this, I apologize. I mean no disrespect.

So, let me get this straight. If I set up an old computer in the corner and script it to just meander around the web 24/7 using Brave, I can rack up a ton of useless BAT tokens/currency/whatever?

I mostly agree with the author. Maybe not on the specifics, but I've yet to find a podcast that I don't mind listening to. I've enjoyed a little bit of MBMBaM and Ear Biscuits, but they're so long! After a certain amount of time, I just zone out and I can't listen anymore. It just becomes noise.

But just wait until the author learns about AM radio! People apparently actually listen to it.

It's absurd. But it's what a lot of people believe. Why else would anyone play the lottery?

A common misconception is "somebody has to win, why not me?"

I don't know why the article is picking out millennials (other than that it's a popular tactic in the news media). You can replace the phrase "American millennials" with "Americans" in the headline and it will hold true.

I'm reminded of something John Oliver said during a segment of Last Week Tonight some years ago about the lottery. It seems that there are only two classes of Americans. The rich and the soon-to-be rich. At least that's what Americans seem to believe.

I wondered this as well. It sounds like Scientific Linux was more just a convenient and consistent package of applications and interface than any significant changes to linux proper.

However, if the various particle labs who used to use Scientific Linux end up requiring any significant code changes for performance reasons, it seems like this change would mean sharing those changes upstream would face an easier path.