JackCh

Personally I feel the best method is using lots of small repos, one for each service or library, that get stitched together by the build system. I know some large tech companies have created such systems and I have experience with one of them working very well (they migrated from perforce). But this is a big change from the monolithic repository model and institutional inertia is very real.

(Perforce will eventually start to hit a wall when you get to the point where money won't buy hardware big enough for Perforce to serve your repo fast, but that's a very long way off for most organizations and I believe there are some mitigations for it.)

https://github.com/simplemobiletools

https://simplemobiletools.github.io/

But when it comes to Fossil, nothing I've seen comes close. It's built on sqlite which I think turns off a lot of people who have prejudices against SQL, but sqlite is the furthest thing from a big 'enterprisey' RDBMS that give most users the shivers. It's a really tight piece of software, and in fact Fossil is created by the creators of sqlite and the sqlite project is managed with Fossil. So fossil's vanguard project (sqlite) has more deployments than even git's vanguard project (linux)! Mercurial has Firefox and Python, nothing to sneeze at; clearly it's a capable VCS, but I guess my point here is that Fossil doesn't get the attention it deserves whenever people talk about a FOSS alternative to git.

In my view, the legitimate choices for FOSS version control these days are git (good enough, and popular) and fossil (featureful and obscure.) Why you would ever pick mercurial instead (marginally better than git, but almost as obscure as fossil) is completely beyond me. It occupies an uncomfortable middle ground of mediocrity.

https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/doc/trunk/www/fossil-v...

(The one caveat here is that Fossil may not be appropriate for very large scale decentralized projects, but frankly that's a problem git and mercurial are solving that most companies don't have.)

(Incidentally, editor extensions for git have almost eliminated my CLI interaction with git. The UX of vim-fugitive is great, and similar extensions exist for just about any modern text editor. I think CLI UX is becoming less and less relevant when it comes to version control.)

As I understand it, the "present" in YBP refers to 68 years ago, 1950. This is related to the advent of carbon dating, and the way widescale nuclear tests altered the proportion of carbon isotopes found in nature.

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

Insofar as 68 years is a rounding error when discussing the Great Pyramids, YBP is a lot less clumsy. But 500 years from now it will probably begin seem just as clumsy as BC/AD. At least this time there is a pragmatic reason for the delineation (carbon 14 levels being altered.) Of course in 1,000 years you'll probably have people on hyper-reddit very smugly pointing out that nuclear testing actually started in 1945 not in 1950, just as today they point out Christ was not born in 0AD. ;)

That's actually pretty neat. Did it taste good?

You seem to have a very dim view of me because I refuse to willingly subject myself to advertisements. Let me assure you, this feeling is mutual. I look down on people who choose to submit themselves to corporate propaganda. Sometimes when I'm visiting people I see them watch television and they stare at the commercials with rapt attention; it disgusts me.

Among other things, they were investigating the use of nuclear bombs to create artificial harbors (probably a lot more feasible than digging a canal across Mexico, but it sure would make one hell of a mess.)

The Soviets had their own version of this program: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_Explosions_for_the_Nat...

Look up "Escalate to De-Escalate." The apparent Russian nuclear doctrine involves small-scale nuclear devices (escalation) used in a regional capacity. Their theory, supposedly, is that if only a small nuclear weapon is used in a limited capacity against a military target, a full-scale nuclear response against civilian populations (aka nuclear Armageddon) would be completely unreasonable and consequently the other side would choose to back down (de-escalation).

Now, whether or not Russia actually believes this or merely wants America to believe that Russia believes this is something of an open question. It could be the case that Russia wouldn't actually dare put Escalate to De-Escalate into practice, but merely claim they think it's a good idea as part of their deterrent strategy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_tag#History

There are times when it's moral to lie, other times when it's immoral to lie, and still other times when morality hardly has anything to do with it at all (such as the above scenario.) We tell small children that it's immoral to lie because we don't trust their moral judgement and would prefer they always tell us the truth.

What was honestly expected? Tumblr was an American company and they got bought by another American company. The brand had a reputation for hardcore pornography which was doubtlessly toxic to advertisers (most of whom are also American companies), so expecting Yahoo to turn a blind eye just wasn't realistic.

If you want a website moderated to the Japanese standard, you should probably find a website run by a Japanese company that supports itself with advertisements purchased by Japanese companies (a Japanese company in the business of selling advertisements to American companies would probably apply the American standard.)

(This is not a rhetorical question.)

This of course has nothing to do with the relational model, and teaching a newbie to use sqlite is a good way of demonstrating that.

Regardless, it seems clear to me the matter of organic vs non-organic is not as clear cut as the organic industry and their prolific passionate proponents would have us believe.

I'm interested in reading more about this perspective. Is this in one of his books? Or does he have articles about this somewhere?