embik

I don’t see Danielle trying to compete in women only sports here, so this boils down to throwing a temper tantrum like a toddler and being rude because you (as in Lunduke, not you as a poster Im answering to) think you have a right to determine how a person feels about themselves, more than the person. There is no excuse for it.

The characterisation of systemd in this post really bothers me, particularly this:

> 70 binaries just for initialising and logging

It’s just not true. Those 70 binaries provide much more functionality than an init system, they can cover a significant portion of system management, including a local DNS resolver, network configuration or system time management. You can dislike the fact everything is so tightly integrated (which feels ironic given that the post goes on to praise a user space from one team), but let’s at least be correct about this.

Looks like they forked _a_ Matrix messenger (FluffyChat, which I haven't heard of before and which doesn't seem to be "the" official Matrix messenger, if such a thing exists) and are running a non-federated Synapse server on the school premises.

That sounds like an overall good idea to me. The client fork might be questionable, but it's clearly targeting a non-technical audience (or, not necessarily technical), so having a low barrier of entry makes sense to me. Kudos to them, hope they can keep it maintained.

That statement definitely needs some numbers to check out, it's a claim that needs backing up. The full nuclear power "pipeline" isn't CO2-neutral either and depends on resources we'll eventually run out of, probably within the next hundred years, maybe sooner [1].

I also don't think that "but what about space requirements" is an argument with enough weight to dismiss the long list of advantages given by the GP. We have so much unused space on roofs. We could get rid of a few parking lots if you're concerned for ground.

[1] https://www.iaea.org/newscenter/pressreleases/worlds-uranium...

I think it would make sense to provide sources with those quotes from March.

I’m admittedly not from the US so I had different scientists talking about the pandemic, but around here 70% vaccination was never considered enough.

I love how much I hate this.

I think there’s a distinction necessary for institutions and private businesses here. Private businesses implement paper-based cancellations to make it harder for people to cancel, not because they‘re bureaucratic per se.

> I guess this cluster API project is maybe something Crossplane would use under the hood?

It’s more likely the other way around: Cluster API needs a so-called infrastructure provider that creates cloud resources to get a Kubernetes cluster running. The logic to join/create a Kubernetes cluster within the VMs created by that is managed by a separate provider, the bootstrap provider.

So, I guess it would be possible to externalise the creation of cloud resources to Crossplane and write a small shim infrastructure provider that just translates your cluster specification into Crossplane resources.

Crossplane has a different use case than Cluster API (create any cloud resources vs create a Kubernetes cluster), so Crossplane using Cluster API doesn’t make a lot of sense. Crossplane basically is „what if Terraform was a Kubernetes Operator“, so that somewhat sounds like what you’re interested in with the later parts of your post.

Understanding the people around you - be it more junior engineers, managers, PMs or other people. They all have motivations and skill sets that are necessary for the big picture.

You get more effective by understanding their needs and why they are asking you for something.

> a single server suffices

A genuine question that I wonder about: How does a single server protect you against someone in your DC pulling a plug by mistake or your cloud provider being unreliable? If it’s a database it seems like a huge potential for going out of business.

I guess if you are running single-server databases you better have a good backup strategy anyway, but is that a risk people and businesses just accept?

This, so much. Interviews are very stressful for candidates, everyone should remember what it's like sitting on the other side.

I've been doing a bit of technical interviewing and I usually try to help people along so they reach the "end" of the interview, especially if they're not doing too well. So many candidates sound defeated when they're struggling with a task and it's a form of respect for me. They've put themselves out there, after all.

Treating candidates - which you know you are going to reject at some point of the interview - with dignity is the right thing to do and can go a long way when it comes to your company's reputation.

I get what you're saying and I think it's a valuable discussion to have (I remain skeptical whether handing off your infrastructure design is a good idea or not; but as someone working in the space I might be biased), but that's not my really my point to be honest.

I think that the documentation is making several technical claims (from the quotes I've provided) that are factually false. You're agreeing that it CAN be done with Terraform. Best practice isn't what is being discussed in the documentation, it claims that reusing isn't possible.

Granted, I'm not your target audience, but I would recommend to a) rephrase those claims so they're closer to the truth and b) start documenting the architecture of your targets and the quality of your Terraform code (does it pass tfsec tests for example).

If someone asked me to review this product for their startup, I would primarily see Terraform modules with unknown quality or architecture.

I'm not sure I get your point - Terraform modules[0] are a generic way to encapsulate a set of Terraform resources. What variables you expose to the outside is up to the module developer - You can expose high-level variables like "service type" and "add a database" in your module as well. No need to understand VPCs, security groups, ACLs, either. The question whether there are high-quality Terraform modules that do that is a different one, that's why I think your service might still be of value _if those modules you maintain are of high quality and do reasonable things, which I haven't verified_.

Maybe you have great ideas for this target concept, but the claims in your documentation[1] that this is new and the inference that Terraform isn't capable of this don't hold up:

> it describes a particular architecture that can produce many possible variations for a wide variety of stacks, depending on configuration.

You can do exactly that, with Terraform modules, today, no digger needed.

[0] https://www.terraform.io/docs/language/modules/develop/index...

[1]https://learn.digger.dev/overview/how-it-works.html#understa...

> The problem with infrastructure-as-code today (Terraform, CloudFormation, CDK, Pulumi, etc) is that it is not reusable. That is because implementation, configuration and interface are mixed up together.

I find this statement from the documentation[0] unfair, given that the "target" concept this introduces seems to be mainly based on Terraform modules to _reuse code and expose an interface_. Terraform has its problems, but this doesn't seem to be right.

At best, this seems to be a curated set of Terraform modules and a managed CD pipeline execution SaaS. I get that it is supposed to simplify things, but it is lacking documentation for what it will do to an AWS account (you'll still pay for it, after all) and even provides documentation on how to drop "raw" Terraform into it. Why not go with Terraform directly then instead of sending your AWS credentials to a SaaS?

[0] https://learn.digger.dev/overview/how-it-works.html#technica...

Please follow up with this, if Mozilla does not understand anything short of the law this might be the only way to make them believe they are actually doing privacy a disservice.

If Google does not respect my privacy, why is the proposed way to gather information based on Google's approach?

And if the way Mozilla gathers data is much more considerate, what results can I expect from it? Better parallel requests and data fetching, hardware acceleration, etc are all features that are missing for me as a Linux user. They don't need my dataset for that, it's probably all in their bug tracker.

My point is not the way you label gathering information from your users but rather that it is about implementing something Google proposed.

If the mechanism works, fine, but why should I use Firefox over Chromium then? Opt-out data collection is in violation to my core beliefs and what I believed to be Mozilla's principles.

Collecting data without asking the user about it is - to me - in violation to the very definition of privacy and calling some way to anonymise data (who guarantees that the cryptographic approach to this is not obsolete in a few years?) "differential privacy" is at the very least dishonest.

This is ridiculous. I use and recommend Firefox for pure ideological reasons, because frankly, Chrome/Chromium is miles ahead of them.

If they start opt-out tracking using the same approach as Google I do not see any reason to use it nor install it for my friends and family. That's some data for you, Mozilla.

> However, Windows 10S does solve a lot of problems for education users in preventing kids from downloading non-Store apps that may not be easily removable.

I may be wrong, but isn't that basically AppLocker? Why introduce a custom version of your operating system if you could easy merge such a feature into already existing administrative tools (assuming that it isn't, I'm not that familiar with AppLocker)?

You're absolutely right, somehow I connected Chromebooks to "always ARM". My bad.

> Can students install anything like Steam on Chromebooks without jailbreaking them?

Turning on "developer mode" isn't exactly jailbreaking, so yes, they have access to the underlying Linux and can even run a Linux desktop environment of their choice on top of ChromeOS. They can't install Steam because that only supports x86 but you can't blame ChromeOS for that.

I'm pretty sure you won't be able to do that with Windows S, so, no, it's not exactly like ChromeOS.

edit: See http://www.dudleymediagroup.com/Detail/id/how-to-game-with-s...

> Both started life as offshoots of the famed XBMC software

Kodi is not an offshoot/fork, it's XBMC's new name.

I'm not sure what they recommend, but the in-place upgrade path for Fedora works really really well.

As far as I know the GPL does not allow trial periods and asking for money later on, but feel free to correct me. That's why elementary cannot do such a thing.

So you don't believe there are blackhats out there? Because somebody has to be breaching online services and it's rather unlikely it's a godly entity doing that.

Felonies exist and people still commit them. Should they? God no. But people with a lower moral code exist and they can be flipped to do "good work" if there's enough money for them (and I think you should get more money in general for your important work anyway). I find the notion of your profession only consisting of good people highly offending to the rest of the world.

I guess the point people (including me) are making is that it should pay off to do the right thing and report a bug that is capable of killing your (core) business. While OP obviously is a honourable person, others might not be and are more interested in getting money than doing the right thing.

Of course it's illegal/wrong to sell an exploit to third parties, but that doesn't stop people from doing illegal things as long as they get money for it. You just don't know about the issues that are sold because that's obviously not going public.

To be fair, this bug is pretty nasty because it allows anyone to get all your stored passwords. That's like the core business of LastPass. LastPass leaking your login credentials for e.g. online banking is really not comparable to deleting Facebook photos.

pass is as safe as your gpg installation and your gpg key because that's the encprytion it uses.

> It was certainly a giant blunder, but like all of these issues they are Windows only, and usually only if you use the factory OS image.

Don't forget that your hardware vendor is also responsible for firmware. Not saying that Lenovo is special in any way here, but delivering terrible software on the factory OS image might have implications for software quality in general.

I'm a Gentoo user myself so from a personal perspective I don't see any problem, but in a professional environment it's another thing I have to do - Install (and update) Go from somewhere because it's obviously not in the CentOS repositories (at least in an acceptable version), set up a build process and make sure to build updated versions, etc. Just dropping in libraries into some directory to be loaded as plugin would be arguably easier and is kinda "standard" for plugin systems.