Punishing the DNS resolver is weird. Would you punish the phone book company for having the number of a criminal listed?
1,954 karma · joined October 7, 2011
The opinions I express here represent my own and not those of my employer.
The fact that we can fix things faster now doesn't mean that we should throw away caution and prevention. The specific point of his tweet is that we're seeing a lot of people starting to skip proper release engineering.
Agents are quick to fix bugs, yes, but it doesn't mean that users will tolerate software that gets completely broken after each new feature is introduced and takes a certain number of days to heal each time.
Clearly there's an advantage for being an early adopter, but the advantage is often overblown, and the cost to get it is often underestimated.
I've been an open source maintainer of one of the biggest open source projects in the world[1], and it wouldn't fill any of these requirements. Anybody else hates it that now "open source" is conflated with Github (a private company, itself not open source) popularity?
Code and feature still need to experience time and stability in order to achieve maturity. We need to give our end users time to try stuff, to shape their opinions and habits. We need to let everyone on the dev team take the time to update their mental model of the project as patches are merged. Heck, I've seen too many Product Owners incapable of telling you clearly what went in and out of the code over the previous 2 releases, and those are usually a few weeks apart.
Making individual tasks faster should give us more time to think in terms of quality and stability. Instead, people want to add more features more often.
Historically the term "Open Source" was specifically developed to divorce the movement from the "social good" ideas that were promoted by Free Software.
That's where I stand. I don't do Open Source to make the world better. I do Open Source because I believe that makes my software better.
I'm not an activist. I'm an engineer. Nothing wrong with activism, all the power to the people doing it, but the licensing I chose for my code doesn't take it into account.
I've written a ton of open source code and I never cared what people do with it, both "good" or "bad". I only want my code to be "useful". Not just to the people I agree with, but to anyone who needs to use a computer.
Of course, I'd rather people use my code to feed the poor than build weapons, but it's just a preference. My conviction is that my code is _freed_ from me and my individual preferences and shared for everyone to use.
I don't think my code is "stolen", if someone uses it to make themselves rich.
I'm not sure what's your point. Are you telling people who use org-mode that they shouldn't?
> We believe Italy, like all countries, has a right to regulate the content on networks inside its borders. But they must do so following the Rule of Law and principles of Due Process.
I live in Italy, I'm a citizen. I don't feel any safer having the internet regulated by a bunch of bureaucrats than I do state actors and bots.
I personally don't have any insight into the situation and I definitely don't want to defend big businesses, I'm just explaining what you're replying to.
If you consider that reviewer bandwidth is very limited in most projects AND that the volume of low-effort-AI-assisted PR has grown incredibly over the past year, now we have a spam problem.
Some of my engineers refuse to review a patch if they detect that it's AI-assisted. They're wrong, but I understand their pain.
"without attribution"?
Did we read the same article?
GDQ: Games Done Quick, the name of the Youtube channel.
OoT: Ocarina of Time, a beloved Zelda game from the 90s.
ACE: Arbitrary Code Execution. A vulnerability that lets you run whatever you want. You can use it to skip huge parts of the game, therefore achieving the fast speedrun
That being said, I agree with you, it does take a lot of time. To me, the switch occurred when I stopped considering this time "wasted" and instead consider it fulfilling. I actively look for the time I'll spend cooking each day, I believe it's a good use of my time and I don't try to rush through it.
I pull it out undercooked so I have time to add enough pasta water in the pan and let it reduce. If it's already al dente by the time it's added to the pan, then I find I have to rush through the mixing.
- Using butter for pasta is something that is typically reserved for people with upset stomach (understand diarrhea). It's not scientific at all, but just something that is commonly done.
- Fettucine Alfredo[1] is a real italian dish invented in Rome. It's made with butter and cheese. It was originally popular in the touristy areas, targeting foreigners, but over time I notice it slowly appearing in "real" restaurants.
- "Pasta Fresca" (tagliatelle, raviolis, tortellinis, etc) is often served with butter-based sauces (like a lot of the traditional northern cuisine).
A simplistic way to think about it is that butter is a rich luxurious ingredient used in the North, whereas the South is more likely to use Olive oil.
Note that other fats can be used, it's not just olive oil: - Carbonara / Alla Gricia will use the animal fat from the _guanciale_ (the cured pig meat) and avoid using any oil or butter - Cacio e pepe will use neither and use the cheese itself as fat for the sauce. It's a simple pasta, but it's difficult to get right, since parmesan/pecorino are diffcult to emulsify. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fettuccine_Alfredo
I agree that finding the right pairing of pasta and sauce does make a difference, but I would also say not to overthink it. Most italians will use whatever's available in the pantry, even if it's sub-optimal.
This is super important. I don't know why the article presents it as optional. It is a vital step for success in my experience.
I do read code. A lot. I'm not the only one. I know many people who do. I know people who print source code on paper to read on their bus ride back home.
Hell, I know people who read some of the most complicated source code you can imagine, annotate it, criticize it, and then blog about it[1].
It's very weird that you doubt it. Why would we lie? For karma and upvotes? I'm not sure I understand your point. We're literally in the comment thread of a post aimed at reading code and you're here arguing that we're not?
[1]: https://kotaku.com/the-exceptional-beauty-of-doom-3s-source-...
Ask Me Anything :)
You'd be surprised how much this statement is wrong. A lot of people enjoy reading the code of the esoteric projects. Case in point, a bunch of HNers are upvoting this and commenting on it.
It's not for you, fine. You're not interested. Fine. Shrug and move on, instead of writing half a dozen posts to let the world know you personally don't care much for it.
PS: you say it's "wasting their time". I've been in software long enough to know that the people who are good at reading code make some of the best programmers on my teams. Friendly advice: Get good at reading code. Especially when it's clunky, weird and esoteric. It'll go a long way.
If you left your front door wide and I robbed you, I'd have committed a crime. There's no "but the front door was open" defense.
> A number of words written with œ were borrowed from French and from Latin into English, where the œ is now rarely written. Modern American English spelling usually substitutes e, so diarrhœa has become diarrhea, although there are some exceptions, such as _phoenix_. In modern British English, the spellings generally keep the o but remove the ligature (e.g. diarrhoea).
In the case of _Hors d'oeuvre_, it seems like the english wikipedia keeps the _o_. [2]
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C5%92 [2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hors_d%27oeuvre
That's a mis-characterization of what's going on here.
Red Hat makes RHEL. Then it (used to) goes *the extra step* of debranding RHEL, removing trademarks, and publishing it to git.centos.org.
Red Hat is not (and cannot) prevent you from getting your hands on digital assets. It just stopped going out of their way to provide you an easy (almost) 1-click way to clone their product for free. You want to create a clone of RHEL? Sure the upstreams are all available, do it.
At the very best, "freeloader" is a term used by someone internally, but I've never ever heard it used in over 10 years in the company.
Full disclosure: Red Hat employee, not writing in the name of the company, views my own and all that. I'm also pretty pissed about CentOS dying, and like many Red Hatters, have voiced my concerns internally. I also happen to think that a lot of the online criticism is unfair, incorrect, and sometimes done in bad faith. So I'm trying to be accurate. As far as I know, nobody in Red Hat calls or even thinks of CentOS/Rocky/Alma/Oracle/... clones as "freeloaders".
If you as a Red Hat customer redistribute the source code, Red Hat won't sue you. You didn't do anything illegal, you are doing what you are allowed to do.
Nothing in the GPL entitles you to future support from Red Hat, source code of future versions or anything of the sorts.
You're free to do whatever you want with the sources. Red Hat is free to stop business with you at any time. There's nothing contradictory here.