bipson

This is not a matter of incompetence. They even had auxiliary cables installed some time ago, one of these was the first to fail.

All well-known best practices don't matter if structures cannot be maintained because the governing bodies deny the necessary funding for maintenance/repairs/operation.

In a sense Arecibo was knowingly "given up".

Same for Austria, which interestingly was considered a "test-market" for international carriers, thus we always had the cheaper contracts and some novel business models quite some time before the rest of the EU (unfortunately not network generations or coverage in general).

The answer is money. Tethering was usually not allowed but you could buy in. You get phones for free, but only if you pay 40€+ a month for the next 2 years for something you actually don't need. E.g. some unlimited services (streaming) while your general data is capped.

I haven't been in the market for such contracts for quite a few years, this has changed a lot in recent times due to "contract-less" cheap providers gobbling up the marketshare. And these packages always disappeared over time and became standard. I don't think tethering is not allowed anywhere anymore.

It is not binary in my experience.

Most professional musicians know their instrument very well - and still know a man for the "hard" stuff, e.g. for thorough maintenance or repairs that require craftsmanship.

And there are obviously variants. The guys that fix their instruments regularly and experiment with e.g. cooking your stings, and musicians that hand them in for the tiniest, easiest tasks.

You would be surprised how many cooks sharpen their knives themselves.

It is also a very wholesome and meditative activity.

That's a very shortsighted view on the world. Particularly if you're working with other people.

Once you are collaborating, there is simply more to good code than what you our your peers know about the code or the language. Working well and effective with others has a huge impact on you, your peers, the "company" and in the end the product.

Further, I know a lot more about my cars than just how to change the tires. E.g. there are know issues with certain popular car models. Knowing about them does help, not every random mechanic does.

Also, if my car does certain things (surprise, they do all the time, they are complex nowadays) that are easily explainable or even somewhere in the manual, I am not going to ask for help every.single.time. I have stuff to do, be somewhere. I am not going to put my car in the dealership all the time.

Git for me is a productivity tool, in particular when I'm working with others.

You sound like the guy I once collaborated with that didn't want to use git (because why should he learn it now?) and instead sending the whole code via skype every day.

What I often experience (see also a lot of comments here):

Some people, however smart, try to force git to do something in particular, without asking first "How can I do x with git" (I don't think I ever had a use case where stackoverflow didn't have a solution for).

Then they end up with a borked repo, everything is confusing (because it should have almost never been in this state), angry at the tool they abused so badly.

Git is solving complex problems, and it obviously has certain idiosyncrasies. But just because you think the developers chose poorly, doesn't necessarily mean git is terrible in the first place (might also be true though, but please prove it by showing a better alternative). I heard mercurial has a lot of fans, but I had a terrible time cleaning up behind colleagues though - everything was easy for them, but they did not know what they were doing and why it was bad. The git branching-workflow helped a lot there.

Often the obvious solution of an outsider is not really a solution.

Could git have named some commands better? Yes, of course. If you don't know what git is doing internally on a checkout, it makes little sense. But this is being worked on.

I would argue that if someone comes up with his very own perfect distributed versioning system intended to be super intuitive and simple, he will in the end also build in complex constructions that make no sense to outsiders that didn't participate in thinking about the complex problem these concepts are trying to solve.

There is a technical difference between an local repo and a remote repo (bare repository) - although I think you can clone from a repo and make this "authoritative", what you usually do is (in your client, not the server)

- add a new remote

- push your tree to this new remote

- remove the old remote (optional)

And that's it.

You're further not supposed to make commits on a remote directly. Usually this fails hard, for a reason.

Honestly I don't think that is git's fault

There is a approximate approach in Austria.

Parties are allowed donations, but they can't spend more than x on election campaigns, no matter where the money is coming from. Time on public TV is kind-of regulated. TV ads are not really a thing, mostly billboards and print.

Can be circumvented though, since it requires parties to declare spendings correctly (and labelled correctly). "Oh, those fancy pens that look like merch? For work if course!" "We didn't rent this venue, a party-friend did"

Difficult to enforce with all the possible loopholes.

Look at the data. It's the opposite way around

Sounds perfectly reasonable.

Why are you afraid of updates then?

Hm, let's dissect.

Upgrade schedule for Fedora is twice a year, yes. Goes by without any issues, stuff still works.

There is change and then there is change. Yes, I understand that some things don't need to change, and why do they always have to. Do I need my Desktop to still resemble 3.11 because "Why did it ever change"? - No.

Some things in life simply change and they always have. I try to keep up where change is necessary.

And if I would be shipping appliances to customers, why should I have "forced updates" of any kind outside of my control? I would never sell anything without my own repos, quality control, etc.

Do you seriously sell Debian devices to anyone and support them, if anything outside of your control breaks? I seriously don't understand the argument.

And if I ship software of any kind that relies on some libraries, I have to maintain it, of course. This includes going with the major releases.

If this is embedded hardware, where there simply are only two or three updates in its lifetime, everything is different of course, but how on earth would I then have forced updates from RedHat??

Where my partner usually steps in is not safety, but time.

It is great if you're able to build some things yourself. But the kid and in particular your partner need your hands on deck, not on the workbench for days on, just to end up with an unfinished crib. And there are so many other, more important things to do that cannot be outsourced that easily.

And once the first kid is in the house, expect interruptions. Oh, kid has a "mild reaction" to a certain vaccination? Forget sleep, forget "stuff that needs to be done", survive while keeping the basics in order. And with more than one kid expect to be on call for every minute you are home. Nothing can go by uninterrupted if you have small kid and a toddler and only four hands.

I envy everyone that has a different experience. Grandparents/relatives help a lot. COVID-19 does not.

Projects suddenly need to be small or non-critical.

You feel OK for now.

There might be depression and increasing anger, once you realise the kid is still needy and your partner is now occupied with #2.

On a more serious note, for me consumption at this point in my life is a vicious cycle that does not make me a happier or better person - yet the circumstances keep pushing me towards it.

Running Fedora since I-don't-even-remember-when (around 2008?) and I was never annoyed (unless I try to run CUDA and the like, because they rely on e.g. an ancient GCC etc.).

In particularly it was a significant improvement over the annoyances of Ubuntu, and I am still angry when thinking about the brief period I was maintaining a bunch of servers running Debian. Really unnecessarily difficult - particularly updating/upgrading and trying to clear the mess their systemd approach caused, in particular missing unit files for popular services (I think it was the isc-dhcp-server).

But, that's literally what was being said above..?

What I was trying to say is: I think in the thread above people are talking about different things.

For the "danish mink mutation" - even if the exception to the rule - some of the above statements might not be true.

It was said (arguably in the news, so, nobody knows if true) that the mutation found in the mink populations in Denmark has a significantly different response to antibodies, in particular, they are less effective.

This is why OP is asking and mentioning the minks in Denmark.

Assuming you are really interested.

Mostly because the world is not one-dimensional.

"Hard lockdown" has drastic socio-economic implications.

"No lockdown" has dramatic/catastrophic socio-economic implications. The easiest to understand: In very short time the ICUs are overrun and people die. A lot of people die.

"Soft lockdown" depends on the people to play along. Which seems more difficult than the people in charge thought it would be (and some still don't believe).

Notably I am not arguing here for what the "right" choice is. It is simply not that easy.

In particular BioNTech from the article was founded 2008. This is their first publicly available "product" - it applies their vision for cancer treatment to specific SARS-nCoV-2 proteins (arguably I don't know if they're working on other ideas as well).

They might be working on this particular vaccine since 2020, but AFAIK they have been working on the specific principle the vaccine uses since 2008.

I think someone should clarify the strands vs. genetic variations here.

Because the reports from Denmarks Mink fiasco indicated that antibodies were not as effective on the mutation that appeared there short time ago. This would contradict the one-fits-all immunity argument.

Although I want to agree, none of the companies started from zero.

All these new technologies, the techniques, the principles were in development since years if not decades.

Not trying to diminish the accomplishments achieved, great effort nontheless. Just saying nobody started from zero here, that would have been insane and frankly impossible.

Maybe there is a slight semantic misunderstanding here, but in fact a "re-infection" is defined as such:

A patient must present a infection and the particular virus must be sequenced, and then present with an infection later on where the virus is again sequenced and identified as sufficiently different from the first sample. Otherwise it cannot be deemed a re-infection.

If these small differences in the genomic sequence are already a different strand, I don't know, not an expert. But all 5 (?) cases known so far had a different sequence identified the second time.

That's the part I was thanking you for ;), since I could not possibly know if you fixed it yourself.

And I would not have expected you to write about something that needs to be changed (in that tone) and doing it yourself immediately afterwards. Why then write about it before fixing it, or in fact at all. Didn't make sense to me.

Also, my thank you could be seen as equally directed towards the stranger that got your hint.

Hm, I don't know, the NW-E390 SERIES looks like it fulfills the requirements, if such a reduced functionality is acceptable to OP.

Don't know what you could/should use on the software side though to manage the content... Life has changed a lot since I last used strictly offline devices, and not only for the better.

Which would not be an issue in almost all cases, since sftp is usually part of the OpenSSH suite, and since you are in most cases using the underlying SSH anyway...

I know that you could have an SSH implementation without sftp - but I'm arguing about the regular case. AFAIK sftp is usually there.

And someone just fixed it shortly after your post. Thanks, I guess?

According to Wikipedia the unification was in the 1860.

This though was built by Ludwig I. which was shortly before that (1825-1848) and according to the link above in response to the (citation link: "embarrassing") "invasion" by Napoleon, in order to fortify/ensure the "germanic identity" of the people that lived there, so that it would not "washed out" by a influx of french identity, thus also the name Walhalla.

At least that's how I understand the (very short) explanation in the above link.

Great explanation.

Which also implies that the mentioned "criteria" are not good, since it is not a clear cut case. It is not binary, I cannot definitely say when something "starts or stops being PC" or where "non-PC" begins, there is a huge grey area nowadays.

It is as such a very meaningless classification.

I'm getting frustrated here. Could you guys stop for a second pretending that your "opponent" is dumb and try to look outside the box?

Again, to me this are entirely arbitrary criteria. They are not "PC-Standards", they are some of many standardized connectors, form factors, etc. and in fact a matter of habit, not defining criteria.

Let me put it differently:

- So is a DTX-Board with an ARM-SoC a PC?

- Is an ATX-Board with a PowerPC but without PCIe a PC? What if we add PCIe?

- Is a SBC with an AMD APU powered by an USB power supply a PC? What if we add an M.2 port?

See where I am going? These are terrible criteria.

Define PC for me.