cuillevel3

"What's an IBM?"

I think there are ways for the company to escape that scheme, maybe by investing into other fields, outsourcing, buying growth and such.

I still find it risky, especially if you join late.

That doesn't sound too bad?

Criticism of the "official" client was also very loud from the start.

I do agree that LetsEncrypt has been a constant source of maintenance problems over the years. For example now, I have to switch to another alternative acme client, since the old one doesn't seem to be in active development anymore...

However, certificates used to be expensive, even unaffordable for some projects.

It's powerful enough to represent documents, which might be too much for data structures:

  <a>This is <b>valid</b> XML</a>

  <config>
    <somekey type="string"><![CDATA[4byte emojii]]></somekey>
  </config>

There are no different human races.

Appealing to virtuousness and living by example, is not going to replace regulation and realigned incentives.

Refresh is horrible on the 7.5in waveshare anyhow.

Just learned, that I'm looking for a 'cognitive map'.

It was only online for two years and was eventually torn down. Well, the cooling tower was, they still have to wait for the reactor to lose it's radioactivity.

Check out https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/THTR-300

And nobody wants a reactor or storage facility in their backyard. Keep in mind Germany has a higher population density than France. And even France has problems to find locations for their new plants.

In the end after Fukushima, there just wasn't enough support left in the population.

There is an absurd amount of trust put in distributions and their package managers. Unless people are paying for it, or use very old software, they probably don't get the level of security they expect.

Software is becoming more complex and moving faster than ever. 'Controlling your dependencies' was always an illusion and a trade-off at best. Often a trade-off against security, inheriting the folder of JAR files from your predecessor and such.

I think of containers and all these new tools as designs which are supposed to help us manage existing complexity. They don't create it, it's already there in the requirements and real-world deployments. The friction we feel, is that some of those tools are not very good (yet), but maybe better than the previous generation (sometimes). On the negative side, there is a lot of nostalgia ("ah, do you remember bare metal...") and unwillingness to change and learn.

Sadly these ways of olde didn't scale. They could only do it for a handful of servers, change request took months and the systems were not to be 'touched'.

> And since nobody is still able to compile things from scratch, everybody just downloads precompiled binaries from random websites. Often without any authentication or signature.

Right, that would have never happened back then, when packages were not signed and freshmeat.net was still a thing. For some reason compiling C code from some website (`wget;./configure;make;make install`) seems to be more secure than `go install`, maybe because nobody understands automake anymore.

Makes sense to apply this to bigger designs, discussing the concepts is more important than following the book by the letter.

It has a long history of vulnerabilities (https://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-358/...).