The iPod Touch never made sense to me.
It is the same form factor as a phone. So why would anyone carry it instead of, or in addition to, their actual phone?
13,342 karma · joined August 8, 2008
It is the same form factor as a phone. So why would anyone carry it instead of, or in addition to, their actual phone?
In the future everyone googling for a password manager will run into these blog posts where reputable security researches explain why 1Password is a bad choice.
It's hard to imagine a more harmful reputation for a company trying to sell a password manager.
We get to choose between Emacs/Vim, Perl/Python, Syslog-ng/RSyslog, ntpd/openntpd and so on.
This has resulted in multiple mature implementations for every core system task.
Yet instead of sticking with this code that has stood the test of time over decades, we threw it all out for a poorly written jack of all trades that gives root to usernames starting with a digit...
UNIX is all about small, composable tools. Do one job and do it well.
One of these tools didn't stand up to the test of time (SysV init) and needed to be replaced.
We could have chosen one of the mature candidates (upstart, runit, minit) or even built a great new one from scratch. Life would have been good.
But instead we ended up with this trainwreck of a monolith that not only replaced init, but at the same time tried to reinvent almost every critical userspace daemon from Syslog to NTP.
It predictably failed on every metric.
Now it is time for the major Linux distributions to conclude this experiment, roll back the Systemd mistake and return to the modularity that made UNIX successful.
Half of all parsing work consists of splitting things into records, by lines, delimiters or whitespace. That's where the great escaping headache begins.
In a better shell the following command would Just Work™:
> find | rm %path/%filename
Nobody will switch from Chrome, Safari or Firefox to the "Brave Browser" in order to have ads injected into their browsing session.
The concept is so fundamentally ridiculous that I can't even muster pity for the people who sunk their money into this scam.
This is a marketing gimmick, not a security feature.
Just as with fingerprint readers[1] the target audience is people who otherwise wouldn't lock their phone at all.
[1] https://arstechnica.com/apple/2013/09/chaos-computer-club-ha...
I would highly recommend to read the link by irfansharif. It's probably the best primer ever written on the subject.
This is HN. A link to an example would be appreciated.
Edit: To clarify, I work with audio codecs too, and can't really think of parameters (other than the compression level?) that would make much sense to adjust on the fly.
If "AI" is used for more than just a buzzword here, then I imagine the answer must be quite interesting.
The world's largest collection of customer service phonecalls might make an interesting training corpus for ML/AI projects.
Why compare a survey (things that developers say) with hard pull request data (things that developers have actually done)?
They will connect to our brains.
> or fit a camera lens, or speakers, > or a large enough screen in there.
Not needed when they are connected to our brains.
Ruby is the 4th most popular language on Github: https://octoverse.github.com/
That's what you call "a bit of a small community"?
Yes. It's what Amazon Glacier runs on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_Glacier#Storage
The Backblaze blog is also a great place to learn about a large storage deployment: https://www.backblaze.com/blog/hard-drive-benchmark-stats-20...
After decades of replacing RHEL where possible (and plenty agony where it wasn't possible) I can not help but chuckle at the idea of even considering the company that brought us 'yum' for a virtualization platform.
If the explanation for +1 is in the post you are upvoting, then the explanation for -1 is just as well in the post you are downvoting.
Because your distinction is wrong.
A drive-by -1 is in no way different from a drive-by +1.
Both are equally useful. Both indicate how many people agree or disagree. Neither explains why someone agrees or disagrees.
Yes, "single source" is very much an euphemism.
In practice it's far from a single source, but rather a poorly synchronized mess. Which is exactly what I'm proposing to fix.
If we were to wrap it into a github-style model then cases could be represented as branches. Case-law would evolve in the form of patches and pull-requests.
All I'm asking is that we upgrade their tooling and process.
Your outlook for the abstraction potential seems overly pessimistic.
Most of Law boils down to a cascade of intermingled conditionals, nothing a computer couldn't handle.
Of course a bit of human intervention will always be required, for value judgements and the "hard questions".
However, in my (limited) experience with lawyers, very little of the time and money that a lawsuit consumes goes into the actual decision making.
The overwhelming majority is wasted on process and formalities.
If all exchanges have invented a liquidity-field, then there's a good chance the next version of FIX will standardize it, no?
Imho the legal system is very much ripe for digitalization. Both on the low-end (where it pretty much consists of overhead), and even more so on the high-end, where the complexity of legal contracts between companies or states has long exceeded what any team of lawyers (much less a mere mortal) can comprehend.
What we really need is a common legal markup language[1]. Sadly, the few efforts that I've heard about seem to be stagnating.
Christopher Barry is most certainly not a troll.
As shown in the LKML and Debian debates, the systemd infestation was firmly opposed by nearly everyone outside the 'vested interest' RedHat filter bubble. And still is.
Some high profile names would be Eric S. Raymond or Patrick Volkerding (creator of Slackware).
Debian has been forked over this; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Devuan
That is not him saying that people should stop developing. It's him saying stop this behaviour.
It's him finally calling Kay Sievers out for being incompetent and an asshole. Which was long overdue.
Sadly it's by far too late and will very likely not change a thing about systemd's "break and extinguish" strategy.
Systemd will continue to break other peoples projects in its effort to replace every mature service implementation with a hacked up systemd imitation.
At least until, hopefully, the major distros finally acknowledge their mistake and roll this disaster back.
Literally everyone with a clue in the matter seems to hate systemd with passion[1].
A long-term Debian Maintainer quit over the issue[2].
Linus himself (as you quoted) seems more than a little annoyed by systemd and its developer.
And yet somehow systemd made its way into all major distros...
I don't think anti-gravity is a silly idea.
We're only starting to learn about the quantum world, and who knows what we will discover beyond that?
I should clarify: The wart is that programmers can introduce their own unchecked Exceptions. This should not be allowed since, as you say, unchecked Exceptions only make sense for unrecoverable runtime errors.
Checked exceptions should only exist in situations where the caller can definitely recover from them.
False dichotomy. Unchecked exceptions become part of the callee's method signature, i.e. the contract that the caller must fulfill.
Arguably almost nobody does the latter correctly when choosing checked exceptions
Baseless claim. I see many people using Exceptions correctly and elegantly, for error handling and flow control.
and the consensus is
Opinion != consensus.
The inclusion of Unchecked Exceptions is one of the biggest warts on the Java language.
It doesn't make the guard clauses disappear. It merely forces the programmer to manually aggregate them at a higher level with even more boilerplate code.