excuses_

It does not incur debt. Sweden or Denmark has been having debt to GDB ratio constantly declining.

I think social democracy can work but it’s hard and requires huge discipline from government and people. Also, it seems much easier to introduce in smaller countries.

I am not sure that’s going to happen. Most of the people does not care about choices. They just want to have comfortable life without worries.

Another thing is that people must feel that their participation does have an effect.

One more aspect is that most of the decisions is not a popularity vote but must be based on knowledge and science. Average people can’t make that choices unless you have extremely well educated population.

Overall, a simple introduction of a technology which will enable more direct democracy is not enough. We need more ground work which will promote individuals with certain values and behaviors.

However, I also do believe that introducing such technology might accelerate that ground work.

> So is it that decentralization is impossible to achieve or that it's achievable, but undesirable? I feel like I'm being gaslighted by the IETF.

While reading this, I tried to apply what they mention at the beginning of the Centralization and Decentralization sections, that is that both are continuums.

They try to quantify this using "centralization risk". For some functions, greater decentralization might be not worth the effort, is actually undesirable, or even impossible due to technical reasons. For others, these are in greater number, everything should be done to prevent centralization.

Depends but overall the US rates put pressure on euro and generally all other currencies. In my country, which does not have euro, the last hike of the US rates got the currency to drop over 2% (which is already super weak). This means that our central bank will need to bump its rates even further.

Typically it means S3 and alike. Not being bounded by disk size of your server.

Or in their case they might refer to horizontal scalability of their storage layer which is independent from computing.

I was trying to learn more about the problem as two of my colleagues were victims of relay attacks, allegedly. Stolen cars were Mazda and Kia. I found claims that only Jaguars and Land Rovers have been resistant to that kind of attack thanks to precise time measurement - similar solution to your description.

I don't have any links and found only [1] this one quickly.

[1] https://teamtalk.jaguarlandrover.com/news/jaguar-land-rover-...

I wonder if Redpanda thinks about or offers some alternative protocol that would be better defined in terms of transaction guarantees. At this point it looks like Kafka’s protocol was a nice try but it needs a major refactoring.

I had much better experience with GCP Cloud Run. Prepare a OCI/Docker image, type `gcloud run` with a few flags and you’re done. In 2021 they added a bunch of features which in my opinion make Cloud Run one of the most trivial ways of deploying containers indented for production usage.

I think you’re right. It’s just not exactly what many people coming from other languages expect from generics.

It’s seems like a static polymorphism but not monomorphism, which also is implemented in Go generics but for simple types.

I wouldn't say it's the whole point but very important one. For simple types the current Go implementation does produce monomorphic functions but for others, for example interfaces and other pointer types, it does pass around a dict with metadata in runtime.

Check out this excellent blog post: https://planetscale.com/blog/generics-can-make-your-go-code-....

In Poland there was a sort of similar story. Politicians from the opposition, lawyers, “difficult” prosecutors have been spied. A few days ago a special commission started investigation but it consists only from opposition politicians. The ruling far-right party pretends this topic does not exist. It’s a farce.

I agree that the term was kinda stollen and in many places Ops became DevOps while still doing Ops stuff 100%.

I think there is a place for both. Going into DevOps does not mean you need to get rid of your Ops team.

I like the approach when Ops are handling the backbone infrastructure of the organization while individual teams work in DevOps methodology meaning they are responsible for building necessary application infra, programs, as well as bringing it to production and monitoring.

I second that. I experienced this drive towards overly complicated pipelines that require a bunch of external systems to work in order to test my application and claims like “it’s impossible to run it locally”.

The answer should be more modular code with clear interfaces and contracts so that I can test as much as possible locally.

The only thing that constantly improves and is really worth considering is safety. I am not even saying about active safety features but the passive ones. They are also in constant development.