MyOutfitIsVague

Small correction: A plurality voted for Trump, not a majority. A majority is more than half of all votes. Trump got less than 50% of votes, he just got more than any other candidate, which is a plurality.

You don't have to "imagine" anything. Here's the 2025 budget request: https://nsf-gov-resources.nsf.gov/files/00_NSF_FY25_CJ_Entir...

I'd be interested in discovering what the breakdown is, DEI vs non-DEI, but I wouldn't be surprised if this move was to censor climate change research, since this administration doesn't consider climate change to be real.

That's pretty cheap. I have 4 vCPUs, 8GB RAM, 80GB disk, and 20TB traffic for €6. NetCup looks like it has 6VCPU, 8GB RAM, 256 GB, and what looks like maybe unlimited traffic for €5.26. That's really good. And it's in the US, where I am, so SSH would be less painful. I'll have to think about possibly switching. Thanks for the heads up.

Sure, if you still want it: https://hetzner.cloud/?ref=WwByfoEfJJdv

I guess it gives you 20 euros in credit, too. That's nice.

Cron has given me a ton of headaches. Between skipped jobs on reboots and DST, inability to properly express some dates ("First Sunday of the Month" is a common one), and worst of all, complete inability to prevent the same job from running multiple times at once, it's been regular headaches for a shop who has leaned very heavily on it. Some cron daemons handle some of these things, but they're not standard, and AIX's cron daemon definitely doesn't have these features. Every job has to be wrapped in a bespoke script to manage things that systemd already does, but much worse.

systemd has given me many headaches, but as a whole, it has saved me far fewer headaches than it has given me.

> Kubernetes is simply too resource-intensive to run on a $10/month VPS with just 1 shared vCPU and 2GB of RAM.

That's more than what I'm paying for far fewer resources than Hetzner. I'm paying about $8 a month for 4 vCPUs and 8GB of RAM: https://www.hetzner.com/cloud

Note that the really affordable ARM servers are German only, so if you're in the US you'll have to deal with higher latency to save that money, but I think it's worth it.

Timers are so much better than cron it's not even funny. Managing Unix machines for decades with teens of thousands of vital cron entries across thousands of machines, the things that can and do go wrong are painful, especially when you include more esoteric systems. The fact that timers are able to be synced up, backed up, and updated as individual files is alone a massive advantage.

Some of these things that "worked for 50 years" have also actually sucked for 50 years. Look at C strings and C error handling. They've "worked", until you hold them slightly wrong and cause the entire world to start leaking sensitive data in a lesser-used code path.

That's not a "fatal" flaw. It just means you have to manually review every output. It can still save you time and still be useful. It's just that vibe coding is stupid for anything that might ever touch production.

> Note that e.g. copyright does not apply to decompiled source code

This is absolutely not true. I've been seeing this claim for years, and it's complete nonsense. Otherwise I'd be able to decompile the entirety of Microsoft Windows and then just redistribute it as my own source code.

> the original authors did not write the decompiled source

The original authors also did not write the compiled binary. The copyright still applies to it.

There is no evidence of illegals voting in any significant number at all. GOP voter suppression had a far bigger effect than a minuscule number of illegals trying to vote for whatever reason.

How many lawsuits were dropped and people pardoned at the discretion of the sitting president? Wasn't he the target of many legitimate lawsuits that were dropped? Didn't he pardon a bunch of people, including convicted fraudsters who grifted millions of dollars, relatively recently?

Somebody in particular is above the law, as are all his cronies.

The J6 pardons make it exceptionally clear that they aren't interested in enforcing any laws. It's abuse of the legal system for their benefit.

Our system has already proceeded differently based on peoples' statuses. Dozens of lawsuits were canned or dropped due to this election.

Mass shootings are significantly rarer than the world (and one's own anxious brain) makes them seem. The risk of dying from a so many other things absolutely dwarf the risk of being shot to death. You're more than twice as likely to die in a car accident than be shot to death. You're more likely to die from an accidental injury than be shot to death by about 10 fold. And that's just for all gun homicides. If you break that down, you're significantly more likely to die by a gun that's shot by yourself, a police officer, or somebody you know than by a stranger. Mass casualty events are even small.

I agree with your point at large, though. The mass shooting panic is a little frustrating when you actually look at the numbers, though. Your risk of dying by gun assault is about 1 in 300, but the risk of dying in a mass shooting is about 1 in 11,000.

I'd say one of the things you have suggested. Copying the license file from spegel into a SPEGEL_LICENSE file in the repository would be sufficient. So would be actually crediting the project properly in the README with something like "portions of this code were taken from the Spegel project, under the MIT license" with a following copy of the MIT license.

I disagree, because then it can be very ambiguous with an existing `|` operator. The language has to be able to tell that this is a pipeline and not doing a bitwise or operation on the output of multiple functions.

Nope, I made a mistake there. It's good practice, when copying code from software with a different license, to call out what code is copied from where, but such a thing is not mandatory.

It's not that an engineer is evil, it's that this mistake should not be happening in a company like Microsoft. It's professionally incompetent at the very best. No trained and professional programmer should be accidentally plagiarizing code.

They have to say what code where is copied from the other project. It can't just be "parts", because that obscures the authorship.

You can open that PR, if you care to identify which parts were copied and label them all. Really, the people who copied the code in the first place should have done so, and really should have known better, given they work for a massive corporation that claims to love open source and has had a massive interest in copyright over the past three decades. It's not just a "mistake", it's unacceptable for a professional programmer for a corporation to take code from a FOSS project without crediting it. That's a level of incompetence bordering on malpractice for a profession that deals so heavily with copyright on a day to day basis.

edit: According to the MIT license, the notice itself just needs to accompany the code, so I was wrong about the specificity needed. Still, it does mean that any further forks would be unable to remove the license without personally identifying if all the original code was removed. It's always better to identify what code belongs to who.

You don't need a 12 month process with a legal department to not take code without giving credit. This is not untrodden ground.

> they mentioned the original project in the README

They thank them for their "generous insights". That's not the same thing. If I take chapters unmodified from Harry Potter and thank Rowling for her "generous insight", that's still not okay.

> Peerd is quite different from Spegel, it's not just a copy with a small patch.

Nobody said it was. It does, however, copy functions and other entire blocks of code with comments directly from Spegel without giving attribution. That is wrong. That is plagiarism.

They do not credit the authors. They thank them for their "insight". That's very much not credit for copied code.

The details are less important. The code that is copied needs to be attributed, either with comments, or a license file that states which files came from the project, or something else, but the specific code does need to be recognizable by a reader as coming from that other source. Comments and copyright headers are the easiest way to do this.

Maybe they will, maybe they won't. I refuse to believe that Microsoft doesn't understand how attribution, copyright, or open source licenses work, though. I believe this is a mistake, but it's a very egregious one that showcases a lack of respect for the communities that Microsoft is exploiting. This mistake should not be possible from an entity like Microsoft.

MIT license doesn't require copyright headers. You need to credit the authors even if the files don't have headers.

MIT license requires attribution, not "a copyright header". It's not concerned when headers, or with sources being pristine, but with people being credited. If I release my software MIT-licenced, but don't have copyright headers, you are not free to copy files without crediting me.

And no, their note in the readme is not an attribution. It's thanking them for "sharing their insights", which in no way is code attribution.

Microsoft violated copyright here, bar none. There is no other reasonable interpretation.

> It's just a well-known example of a book that most people would agree to restrict.

I don't think most reasonable people would agree to restrict such an impactful piece of history. It's shocking to me that people think something they disagree with should be entirely censored.

The AI Safety dance?

It depends heavily on features used, too. C++ without templates compiles nearly as quickly as C.

> if you dont engage with the community and dont accept PRs it is not open source

You'd be really hard pressed to find somebody who doesn't consider SQLite to be open source.

Yesterday, Trump was talking about sending "homegrown criminals" to El Salvador, asking for 5 prisons be built for the purpose.