ishigoemon

And 'mc' was a clone of Norton Commander! I don't know if it had precursors, but I'd be interested if anyone does.

It's a shame that helm v3 didn't move forward with the lua engine[0]. I don't imagine ~=/1-based arrays were a worse timeline... And here we are 5 years later.

[0] https://github.com/helm/helm/issues/5084

> I just calculated by risk of dying from COVID-19 on https://www.qcovid.org/ and it is 1 in 15873.

It's not the risk of you dying that is important. It's the risk of you passing it on to other people.

If your son passes it on to his grandparents, teachers, service workers, or even his girlfriends immunodeficient sibling, would you still think it's absolute madness?

This video has a great visual explanation of grounding, imho.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-W42tk-fWc

Bash can as well, though I'm not certain if the OS X version is new enough.

http://wiki.bash-hackers.org/syntax/shellvars#histtimeformat

A TCP socket teardown followed by a reconnect is hardly the equivalent of ramming a floating chunk of ice. There are a bunch of reasons you will see that teardown in practice, like NAT timeouts in a home router, or carrier-grade 6to4 NAT, or mobile devices rehoming to a new tower, or anywhere else that state is tied to the path.

Sure this is a deliberately produced failure, but only in the sense that this is a "normal" failure. This is a condition that is to be expected on the internet, and this is simply an additional place it occurs.

I'd argue that this design promotes building reliable applications. A system that cannot reconnect is fragile, and the best way to know if the system can handle that failure is to occasionally induce the event. Assuming that you are running across a lossless, ideal network is, IMHO, the very definition of Bad Design.

"If it hurts, do it more often." -- Martin Fowler

Why do you call his attitude seriously bad? I agree with him, portability leads to complexity and therefore isn't worth it when you are trying to move fast. You may disagree that OSS should move fast, of course, but why should you want to slow down others?

Free software doesn't need to even support free operating systems, for that matter. I'm sure that there are Windows-only apps that are F/OSS, though I don't know of any off-hand. Of course the systemd developers don't need to support any other OS to write "Free Desktop" software, any more then the FreeBSD developers shouldn't feel compelled to port their filesystems, init-system, or anything else to Linux.