21,123 karma · joined October 28, 2016
https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Afreebsd%2Ffreebsd-ports+%...
https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Avoid-linux%2Fvoid-package...
https://github.com/search?q=repo%3ANixOS%2Fnixpkgs+%22EUPL12...
Most of the software from the EU and some governments are also under EUPL, but those tend to be "source dumps" that no one really builds.
Focusing so strongly on immigration and related issues only strengthens Farage. It does nothing to convince the die-hard Reform people and alienates your own voters. We're already seeing Labour split to a new party (well, assuming it doesn't implode in classic left-wing infighting). It's lose-lose.
Labour won 2/3rd of MPs with just 1/3rd of the vote, the biggest gap between MPs and vote share in modern history by quite a margin. In many ways they "lost" last year's election because that's a very underwhelming result after running against a deeply unpopular government that's been in government for almost 15 years. They've been on a thin ice since day one.
All of this is such an obvious mistake that I truly don't understand what Starmer is even thinking.
While I would not be surprised at all there's something to this, things like "improve and enhance our vision and brain function, at any age, along with it our sleep, balance, attention, and our cognitive and mental health" kind of set off my bullshit detector a bit. That seems way too many conditions to fix "with one easy trick!"
Things like "go out and have a walk" also exposes you to fresh air, and even mild exercise can make you feel better for all sorts of reasons. Is it really primarily about the vision system as the article says? Not so clear to me. This sounds a bit too much of a tunnel-visioned viewpoint.
I also have an Arch machine where it does link to libcrypto, and it seems roughly identical (or close enough that I don't care, this is a live server doing tons of $stuff so has big error bars):
md5sum 1.58s user 0.31s system 98% cpu 1.908 total
~/verify -a md5 1.59s user 0.13s system 99% cpu 1.719 total
sha256sum 0.71s user 0.12s system 99% cpu 0.840 total
~/verify -a sha256 0.74s user 0.12s system 99% cpu 0.862 total
Still wish it could do multi-core though; one reason I looked in to this is because I wanted to check 400G of files and had 15 cores doing nothing (I know GNU parallel exists, but I find it hard to use and am never quite sure I'm using it correctly, so it's faster to write my own little Go program – especially for verifying files).If you're on Linux the dot on the cover is /sys/class/leds/tpacpi::lid_logo_dot. See the other files in that directory for other LEDs.
I don't know about Windows off-hand because I don't use it, but the BIOS exposes the functionality so there should be a program to do it. In a quick search: https://github.com/valinet/ThinkPadLEDControl
FreeBSD doesn't support it, but quite easy to write a patch for it if you want it (I actually wrote a patch for this, but didn't really put the finishing touches on it and submit it as my previous one got no feedback at all, so *shrug* – I ended up just installing Linux again). Same for the other BSDs.
[1]: You need to compile your own kernel for the charging/power LED which wasn't needed on older models, because that's registered as "unknown LED" and protected behind a compile option. It's a tad annoying, but it's possible.
Writing bugs in Rust is trivial and happens all the time. "do_stuff(sysv[1], sysv[2])" is a bug if you reversed the sysv arguments by accident. You can easily create a more complex version of that with a few "if" conditionals and interaction with other flags.
There are many such silly things people can – and do – trivially get wrong all the time. Most bugs I've written are of the "I'm a bloody idiot"-type. The only way to have a fool-proof compiler is to know intent.
What people may say is something like "if it compiles, then it runs", which is generally true, but doesn't mean it does the right thing (i.e. is free of bugs).
That is not a quote from that post. I am very much not pedantic about only using quotation marks for quotes as long as it reasonably accurately gets the gist right, but in this case it very much doesn't.
You are leaving out the qualified language of "generally", which completely changes what was said. And worse, the post explicitly acknowledges that it doesn't solve all bugs in the next sentence.
And even if you can dig deep and find someone using unqualified language somewhere, I'm willing to bet a lot of money that this is an oversight and when pressed they will immediately admit so (on account of this being an internet forum and not a scientific paper, and people are careless sometimes). "I like coffee" rarely means "I always like coffee, all the time, without exception".
The https://lore.kernel.org site is actually fairly decent, but limited to Linux kernel stuff and some adjacent projects. Gmane was quite nice too, but now defunct (the web UI anyway).
"Just use mutt" as a reply to "I want to read this one email thread" is rather missing the point. Plus the reality is most people neither use nor want mutt. Many people think the UX on mutt is horrible. Nice if it works for you, but it doesn't for many. So there's that.
So doesn't seem that obvious at all.
I remember random mundane events from tons of random days, unconnected to any prominent event (as near as I can determine anyway). And I also remember some random mundane stuff from days something prominent did happen. Whether there's a bias towards days with prominent events is entirely unclear to me.
At any rate, small teething issues aside, long-term things should be better and faster.
Yes, that was my take-away.
I didn't measure setting keys or req/sec because for my use case keys were updated infrequently.
I generally find ms to be a more useful metric than reqs/sec or latency at full load, as this is not a typical load. Or at least wasn't for my use case.
Of course all depends on your use case etc. etc. In some cases throughput does matter. I would encourage everyone to run their own benchmarks suited to their own use case to be sure – should be quick and easy.
As I rule I recommend starting with PostgreSQL and using something else only if you're heavily using the cache or you run in to problems. Redis isn't too hard to run, but still just one less service to worry about. Or alternatively, just use a in-memory DB. Not always appropriate of course, but sometimes it is.
Whether you believe them is another issue of course. But you need to at least try and no one ever did. After many years of refusing to talk to the IRA in the end the British government did, and that was key to the lasting peace. This was hugely controversial at the time and Major government lead talks in secret which were leaked. Lots of drama. But in the end it worked. In 1988 people could have said about the IRA what you're saying about Hamas (and they did). The Good Friday accord didn't even demand immediate disarmament by the way, but rather over time. There were plenty of violent hick-ups too (e.g. Real IRA).
And sure, long-term there is no future for Hamas – certainly not the paramilitary wing – just as there wasn't for the IRA. But Sinn Féin (IRA's political wing) still exists and that's okay. It's impossible to exclude Hamas from any and all negotiations in the short term because they're doing the fighting.
A pure military solution will never be the answer (well, except via genocide, which is hardly an "answer"). Even if one could kill every single Hamas member, you will just end up with a new Hamas-ng and we're back where we started. This is why you need to address some of the underlying injustices, which is that the British government did.
And that was my entire point. Everything may seem impossible and hopeless today. But so did things in 1988 NI. There are real challenges for sure, but the outlines of a solution are actually not all that complicated.
Of course it's easy to say in hindsight they "knew" or "could have known", but in hindsight everything is easy, right? There were rumours about Jimmy Saville going back to the 70s, but did the British public really "know" what he was up to? Evne Mark Lawson, one of the few people who actually did stop and report a sexual assault (in 2006, see [1]) didn't really know the full extent of things, not really. He may have suspected, but that's not the same.
Another thing is that during the first world war there was a lot of (mostly British) propaganda about atrocities Germans were supposed to have committed, from raped and crucified nuns to Germans killing children for sport to the infamous "German Corpse Factory". This was widely reported and believed during the war, but after the war this all turned out to be a huge load of bollocks. It severely undermined the trust in the media.
There was 21 years between the wars – that's less time than the start of the Iraq war and today. Imagine what your response would be if the US government would say "we found weapons of mass destruction in $country, here as some vague satellite photos as evidence, we have no choice but to invade".
[1]: https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2022/apr/01/the-day...
The dilemma that The Guardian faces is that it neither wants to draw attention to the lie, but also doesn't want to let it stand without some counter-argument. After all, if you just ignore everything then no counter-argument is ever offered and that's not good either.
This is really the "democracy hack" they're using: you don't want to draw attention to it, but you also can't really ignore it. In a healthy system, people that employ these kind of shameless dirty tricks would be excluded by the sense of civic duty of other people of their own party, as well as enlightened self-interest because in the end this will be bad for everyone. Yet here we are.