SPascareli13

If the orq instruction was really a noop then there would be no problem as well?

That's 402Tbps. I don't know why the title uses this weird "402M Mbps".

The thing about your comment is that it seems that you believe containers are something you use for added security, and that is very much not the case.

But I don't disagree about rootless containers being more secure than rooted ones, just as much as any process not running as root has less privileges then one running as root.

Docker (and containers in general) adds namespacing, but not security, for applications. If anything, docker can add MORE attack vectors.

No one should use containers primarily for security ever.

Robert is such a cool guy, glad to see this here in HN.

Did you read the article? It clearly show that it is. I just don't understand why.

How is this not a compiler bug? What would justify a nil check being many times more expensive then a bool check?

Love this paper! I read it after watching Dr. Pavlo lessons on YouTube.

The thing about looking under the hood into the complexity of the tool you're using is that is can make you consider my initial question in this thread: Do I REALLY need all of this for my use case?

I think if more people would do this exercise they would find that they don't need it, or at least that they might need some form of state reconciliation, but not enough to really warrant all the complexity the tool introduces. Some will find that they don't need it but will still use it for other reasons, like familiarity or because that's what their team uses.

The problem seems to be that the fundamental abstractions in web (HTML and the DOM) are not suited to modern web apps. This much complexity around state management shouldn't be needed.

Not a critic to the article itself, in fact I know nothing about React and learned a lot from the it, but...do we REALLY need all of this to render web pages? Even if it is a web application and not just a page, doesn't this ecosystem seem too complicated for the problem it solves?

This is the thing about simple things, usually to maintain a simple "face" they require quite a lot of sophistication on the inside. Like the stackoverflow example, they have a simple architecture, but to make that work they did a lot of very low level optimizations, have a deep understanding of their stack and database, and also hosted their own servers. Basically, it takes a lot of skill to build something "simple".

Were any of this vulnerabilities disclosed? I saw that Google blocked it in some places, but without fully understanding what are these vulnerabilities it's hard to make a good judgement on whether it is usable or not in some application.

So, is io_uring used anywhere yet?

It's been a while since I used PHP, but this is something controlled by the server used. If you use Apache then it used to create a new process for each request, yes.

Are you talking about GMES?

It is only in the difference between the brackets, technically you should never make less money by going into a higher bracket, just less then you expected.

Using them.

I made this mistake in a project at work...never again.

How does it compare to something like apache airflow? I like the native Go integration, and that it is specifically mentioned that the overhead is minimal to start a job. Airflow can take quite a varying amount of time to schedule your job.

Now I'm curious, where is this retro computing community that dislike him? I follow him on yt but don't participate in the community.

As someone with no interest in oldschool computers beyond curiosity, I think this project looks like a great opportunity to see a project collapse in real time due to feature creep and bad decisions.

Buying machinery and trying to assemble THD boards at his garage? I know assembling this board would've been expensive, but there is no way that the best decision is to try doing it at home with no skills.

Also, if the sound chip was so available when he first checked, why didn't he just bought it right then? Even one thousand of them would've been cheaper then trying to redesign now. And not only that, he is now thinking of using ANOTHER not currently in production chip BECAUSE HE THINKS IT HAS ENOUGH STOCK! facepalm, just incredible bad decision making.

I guarantee that you can be sitting in a chair all day and still not get any work done.

The only thing this might measure is time you are available to do work, but the same can be done remotely.

Great! I took a quick look and saw there it seems to be available locally, and pretty cheaply even.

A few questions, I saw that the chip itself is surface mount, would I need to make my own PCBs to be able to make more "permanent" projects with it? Also, what kinds of external things I would need to get started, like specific programmer hardware, etc.

I think of it more like "direct" control over the hardware, like no RTOS and no framework, just your binary code running directly by the processor, and accessing the hardware features via registers.

With the ESP32 it seems that this is not something reasonable to do, as most things require extensive setup that is implemented in the framework.

It's amazing how quickly you can make something that works with the EPS32 and Arduino, but for me, since this is for learning I feel I'm not really learning too much since so much is abstracted from you. As far as I know you just can't reasonably do bare metal programming on the EPS32.

So for the simple project I am doing right now I'm using a 8051 microcontroller (AT89S51), mostly because it is super cheap to buy locally but also I am forced to deal more with the details of how embedded applications run. But it does feel like learning 8051 is not too relevant today.

I have come to the very same realization as you in the "temp channel for a project" thing.

Before this, the devs would make a private channel without product and management people, to discuss technical things openly or just to complain. But product/management was unhappy to be left out of this communication channel.

Eventually we, devs, decided on our own to end the private channel and "banalize" the main team channel, by that I mean that we were going to try to make the main channel less "official" looking and more casual, like sending memes, talking outside of threads and so on. With the intention of making people mor comfortable in using it.

This had mixed to low effectiveness, some people were more comfortable speaking entirely on the main channel, some other people pretty much just started only using private conversations and never used the main channel.

So my solution was to create a temporary project channel, open, but only with devs explicitly invited (but communicated at the main channel that the channel existed). This channel is implied to be a dev channel, but whoever wants to join in can, or they can also just peek in without joining, being a public channel.

So far this has been working well, as long as you are in a reasonably long running project. I have archived more then one of these channels as the projects ended, and I'm thinking of maybe not even achieving the current one and just rename it after the project, let's see.

So, keep of trying to make this fly with your team, it did worked somewhat with mine.

I came from Amazonas, a Brazilian state which contains most of the Brazilian Amazon. And yes not many Brazilians know the Amazon, most probably live as far from the Amazon as US is (Brazil is really big!).

Jesus, I remember finding this game in my earliest internet adventures, I don't know if I ever got to actually play it tho. Maybe I should try it now...

I use ASDF and it's very good to manage versions, specially if you have multiple projects with different versions of go or node, for example.

You don't even need to manually switch, you can set a version per folder!

Of course, the thing about bash scripts is that they are super specialized to do one thing, that usually only really works for the creator's workflow.