734 karma · joined April 2, 2009
What I'm looking for is an 8GB phone that I can run Docker on, to host apps like DHIS2 & OpenMRS3 (so a JVM). I have the impression that this isn't easily possible with Halium-based kernels, but I'm not an expert.
Edit: oh and full access to the radio chips, so I can set up mesh networks (and a cherry on top :-))
Things like running a distributed database for a community on top of the devices they own, hopefully also running true mesh networking.
In my personal GH account there is a "sponsor" button that shows me what dependencies I have that I could sponsor. Unfortunately the list is empty.
My _organisations_ have hundreds of repo's, but there's no "sponsor" option at the org level in GH that says what dependencies the orgs use and then set up batch transactions at that level.
The dependency data already exists in dependabot for a lot of stuff, so it wouldn't be starting from scratch.
SDR + something like Reticulum or Yggdrasil would definitely provide the infra or network fabric for the kind of thing I'm thinking of.
However, a normal Android, e.g. a Pixel 7, can't to my knowledge be turned into a web server or a podman host for containers. (I know of people hosting websites on old Androids that are flashed or hacked).
Given phones already have a WiFi/WLAN radio chip, it's a shame to need extra kit for connectivity.
It's something that's been on my mind a lot recently and so you provoked me into writing down a series of scenarios in story format that illustrates what SHOULD be possible using current hardware, were it not, as dlcarrier says, locked down like a games console.
Here you go:
Think mesh networking, resilient ad-hoc application clustering, non-Internet P2P, like Freifunk but everywhere. We shouldn't have to depend on Google or any of the big tech companies for anything except the hardware.
That would offer much more freedom. There are also contexts where this kind of thing could also enable life-saving applications. And unlike todays Internet where a database query in Cloudflare or a DNS bug in es-east-1 can disrupt half the services we use, this kind of technology really could withstand major attacks on infrastructure hubs, like the Internet was originally designed to do.
So it's not like you need to crawl the sites to get content for training your models...
Massive respect to this ED.
Honestly, people complain about software all the time and all software sucks to some extent, some more than others of course. Complaining about all EMR just because the USA bodged a national rollout in their uniquely messed up healthcare situation is a bit myopic.
Needless to say we don't have a Fortune 500 budget. When I see a nice, affordable app that says "and here's a Docker image!" next to the SaaS options, I am like ( ˘ ³ ˘ ) ♥
GPG is just one guy. Who's practically beggared himself writing and maintaining the tool.
GPG is actually used by human rights activists, journalists etc. That, right there, is reason enough to celebrate it and NOT "kill it off".
I think the massive pile-on this is creating is really dumb, to be honest. So Moxie thinks it could be done better; that's great. He's good enough that he can "show, not tell".
Why waste time denigrating a project that's basically a labour of love for one guy that is actually tremendously important, even if it's "90's technology"? Old doesn't necessarily mean bad.
"But, at first, cautious NASA bureaucrats didn’t want to stop the construction on their own authority. And then Congress — at the urging of a senator from Mississippi — swooped in and ordered the agency to finish the tower, no matter what."
Why condemn NASA for cronyism and Congressional stupidity?
>By design as in, that's the only way the network could conceivably work.
This network, yes. But you can construct truly anonymous cryptocurrencies with e.g. zero-knowledge proofs, yet the author(s) chose not to. This would have enabled AP, maybe answering PGs question in point #2 of his post (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5547423).
I didn't know the original code was that buggy, I confess I was lulled a bit by the line "This was the only major security flaw found and exploited in Bitcoin's history" in the wiki article. Maybe it needs changing in the light of https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Common_Vulnerabilities_and_Exposu... :-)
Point 6 is my main stepping-stone from 'organised and capable' to 'government'. FWIW governments have deliberately set up 'dodgy banks' as a way of attracting money launderers and then busting them, so I think it's valid.
This is super-interesting - may I ask where you learned about this part of the history of the postal service?
However, I think that continuations are still very cool, and are especially cool when they can be serialized or written to disk/transmitted/etc., because this essentially lets you "time/space-shift" your thread/process, since it's just bits.
Right now, "suspending" a process is something that happens when you close your laptop or pause a VM, but I think that being able to do this at a much more fine-grained level of detail is what will allow general cloud-based computation to really take off, because individual threads would be portable across computing environments.
For me this is the logical consequence of the increasing "digitization" of the structure of our society, i.e. social networks etc. Basulto has jumped from this to Rushkoff's "program or be programmed" idea. But in the large scale the "programs" that define new social spaces is actually written by a very, very small number of people mostly in California, and have nothing to do with campaigning for anything.
moocow01 is correct to say that people going to Codecademy to learn how to launch online campaigns will be disappointed. This is partly because we don't have an API layer for programs that organise social interactions, and this is one reason why I'm working on a project that does just that.
Secondly I would agree that WebKit has its own OS X-related baggage, but that just goes to show that nobody's perfect. It's not an argument for adding more. I would also agree that in the hypothetical case of Dart support being added to WebKit that Google would be expected to maintain their code, just as Apple would be expected to maintain OS X stuff.
But again, I think the original conversation was had at cross-purposes. What started as a conversation about hosting a branch of WebKit to do some innovating turned into a conversation about standards and the broader web. In the former case it's a purely technical question of where the work is done, but in the latter, I think the "participate in the web standards community" bit comes in to play. Why did Google come directly to WebKit to ask about integrating Dart instead of talking to e.g. the W3C or WHATWG?