nullindividual

Heavily editorialized title by the article author. Autistic/ADHD individual wishes to commit suicide under Canada’s MAID program.

Source article (which the article author left the Bing search query on… of course, Facebook): https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/calgary-maid-father-d...

(May not be available outside of the US)

No context removed, just a hot headed police officer attempting to murder an individual in a fully defensive position.

The first cop was doing great until the second one showed up.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/sultan-man-sues-two-snohomi...

> What's true is that you could not just shop for hardware, especially new model hardware without first checking that it would work.

And yes, while video cards certainly did work, often they were restricted to non-accelerated modes. Hence, "hardware support was garbage".

If we're gate keeping because the drivers were developed by volunteers, please keep me out of the gate.

You speak as if I have zero experience of Linux back in the dark ages. Please don't do that. I was there. I configured these things. It was not "easy" relative to other contemporary operating systems. And I enjoyed it!

> It’s basically a website that returns reviews that reference a specific menu item regarding a specific restaurant.

The more fundamental problem with reviews is:

A) People have shit taste in food (grandpa who can't taste salt anymore and the family in BFE where every Sunday dinner is at IHop shouldn't be reviewing food)

B) Food is inconsistent

Health Department reviews of restaurants however, is a great indicator of quality and care.

Some people have a difficult time writing. Simply examine any developer documentation or code samples ;-)

Wikipedia entry:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suzetrigine

Trying to figure out how to disappear into the ether.

I'm speaking from 1997-1999. TUI was still the way to install Slack/RH. X11 manual conf editing was still the way to configure X.

HW support was still garbage.

Expand on that thought, in terms of Linux for the contemporary desktop of the era.

The author is delusional.

Linux kernel hardware support was garbage in the 90s. Linux UX was garbage in the 90s (not much has changed).

Yeah, I remember how TUIs were the “friendly” way to install distros. Or configuring X11 for my specific CRT and video card…

Sure, Microsoft did illegal things to keep competing OSes off of OEM desktops, but Linux was never a contender in the 90s.

Note how the author blames the user for any and all faults with Linux. That’s poor form.

I was confused as to why you were posting incorrect information when this thread already contained the correct information.

From an NTFS auditing perspective, there’s no difference between auditing a non-EFS file or EFS file. Knowing that file auditing works just fine having done it many times, what makes you say it doesn’t work?

Quoting Windows Internals 7th Edt Part 1:

    There is an unfortunate side effect of large pages. Each page (whether huge, large, or small) must be mapped with a single protection that applies to the entire page. This is because hardware memory protection is on a per-page basis. If a large page contains, for example, both read-only code and read/write data, the page must be marked as read/write, meaning that the code will be writable. As a result, device drivers or other kernel-mode code could, either maliciously or due to a bug, modify what is supposed to be read-only operating system or driver code without causing a memory access violation.

Windows has 4K, 2M, and 1G page sizes on x86-64.

Remember that Win32 process creation is expensive[0]. And on NT, processes don't run, threads do.

The strategy of applications, like olde-tymey Apache using multiple processes to handle incoming connections is fine on UN*X, but terrible on Windows.

[0] https://fourcore.io/blogs/how-a-windows-process-is-created-p...

> this message doesn't provide much actionable information

Even if it did, you'd likely not be able to do anything with that information (i.e., a web app returning an HTTP 500).

Details potentially leaks information the developer doesn't want out there. For example, in SharePoint Online you wouldn't want the correlation log provided to the end user -- it's not useful to the end user, it isn't necessarily limited to just what they did, and it may contain PII.

> unhelpful to the developers who presumably implemented that error messaging

In my example above, the user would relay to a technical support individual the date/time/<other information>, and the support individual could then correlate within the logs, potentially passing it back to the developer.

Now, if the developer did a poor job of correlating "friendly" error messages to something that can be diagnosed on the backend, that's on them.

4K, 2M ("large page"), or 1G ("huge page") on x86-64. A single allocation request can consist of multiple page sizes. From Windows Internal 7th Edt Part 1:

    On Windows 10 version 1607 x64 and Server 2016 systems, large pages may also be mapped with huge pages, which are 1 GB in size. This is done automatically if the allocation size requested is larger than 1 GB, but it does not have to be a multiple of 1 GB. For example, an allocation of 1040 MB would result in using one huge page (1024 MB) plus 8 “normal” large pages (16 MB divided by 2 MB).

> salary expectations

If you're a resident of Washington State, withholding salary ranges is against the law [0][1] in many cases. Potential employees can file a civil suit, otherwise the State will take up the case.

[0]https://lni.wa.gov/forms-publications/F700-225-000.pdf

[1]https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.110

CPLs are quite small and a small number of files to support it.

> The one I notice the most is the filesystem.

This is due to the extensible file system filter model in place; I'm not aware of another OS that implements this feature and is primarily used for antivirus, but can be used by any developer for any purpose.

It applies to all file systems on Windows.

DevDrive[0] is Microsoft's current solution to this.

> Meanwhile Win10 Explorer opens after a noticeable delay

This could be, again, largely due to 3rd party hooks (or 1st party software that doesn't ship with Windows) into Explorer.

[0] https://devblogs.microsoft.com/visualstudio/devdrive/

That depends on how you value transparency. In the US, for example, transparency is everything -- and it hurts _a lot_ of people.

I'm not sure it's SMP/multithreading support was anything terribly special; NT4 Workstation had the same capabilities.

Someone posted one of these not too far long ago. This one has the same issue of accepting non-food, including harmful items as ingredients.

Title: HCl-Infused Caesar Lettuce Salad

This unique recipe creatively combines the fresh crunch of lettuce with the robust flavors of classic Caesar dressing while incorporating HCl for a twist in taste.

Ingredients:

    Fresh lettuce (any leafy variety)
    Caesar dressing (2 tablespoons)
    HCl (a small drop for flavor enhancement)
    Optional: Drill bits (for decorative presentation, not for consumption)

Entropy declares this is a fool's errand.

I don’t know what the PS OS uses under the hood.

In a transparent system, the governing body would have released the name.

A vote of no confidence over not releasing the name is appropriate.

Xbox uses Hyper-V on Windows. bhyve support is meaningless.

This is my dystopian nightmare.

Do these individuals not go into nature to get away from human influence? I mean, maybe not given they're setting up with vehicles and what-not. Hardly "back country" when you can simply drive away from it.

> It doesn't make sense to put editor-specific stuff in the project's .gitignore because the editor or IDE a contributor chooses to use to develop the project is orthogonal to the code in the project.

Why not? What's the harm?

There seems to be zero significant downsides to include editor or operating system-specific patterns in the project .gitignore. A long .gitignore doesn't cause performance issues.

To wit, you'll ultimately have someone without a global .gitignore that will lead to PR cleanup (or worse, direct commits).

The project level .gitignore prevents mistakes by all committers. This is superior to trusting a developer correctly set up their own .gitignore.

I think this is getting to the level of "optimization" because it feels good rather than doing any true good.

You'd still need a repository .gitignore, more-so if you're not working in a professional development shop (i.e., SMB/enterprise IT) or open source project.

There don't seem to be any downsides to a long .gitignore. Who cares if it is 100 or 1000 lines?

Kind of pointless, in my view. I think a user-global .gitignore is fine to have to make sure you don't make mistakes for net-new projects or projects where someone forgot to add your exclusions, but otherwise, you're going to need both if you choose to use a user-global.