leotaku

This is great news! MOBI and especially KF8 (Amazon flavour of XHTML on MOBI) are horribly complex by virtue of them being additional layers over the PalmDB format, which on it's own is actually quite elegant.

I've spent quite some time on building a fully featured MOBI library[1]. A bit sad that my work will become obsolete this quickly, but definitely good in the long run.

[1]: https://github.com/leotaku/mobi

From what I've seen the likelihood of triggering a pathological case with real-world non-malicious data is actually low enough to be ignored, given that the rolling hash function is well-crafted. I do agree that crafting malicious data to break deduplication in Dolt should be relatively easy, but I do not see how this could lead to DOS on e.g. a hosted Dolt platform. If I understand correctly, your proposed attack would only affect the rate of deduplication and by extension disk space used, and I would expect a hosted Dolt platform to have strict disk-space limits or use storage-based billing.

Some CDC implementations I have seen use a desired "average" chunk size value in addition to a minimum and maximum value. If the chunk exceeds the desired average size, the test for recognizing a byte sequence as a stop becomes more forgiving. Other solutions also retry previously processed sequences using the simpler threshold.

However, from what I've seen, these methods generally come at the cost of deduplication and/or speed. The most reliable method to avoid pathological cases seems to just be setting the min/max chunk size to a low/high enough value respectively.

If you're talking in a purely theoretical sense, I would assume that the possibility of changes affecting non-local chunks is inherent to CDC. With well-chosen parameters the likelihood of any but the closest chunks being affected just becomes low enough to be negligible.

I don't know about BuildKit and `docker buildx`, but I've been using an approach similar to what is outlined in paragraph two to generate static executables for one of my projects.

I use a multistage build to generate a podman/docker image that contains all my build artifacts and then just copy them out of the container onto my host system. What advantages would there be in using BuildKit for this sort of thing?

I remember introducing a middle schooler to programming using Scratch at my highschool's open day. I had spent a few hours making a simple two player shooting game and a maze generator for the IT class display. Most kids just wanted to play the games, but seeing just one of them be genuinely excited about the possibility of creating his own interactive experiences, asking questions about how certain mechanics were implemented, what I did to get to this point, if I thought he would be able to create similar things, was really encouraging. Probably didn't make a difference in the long run, but still a treasured memory for me.

Thank you for your response! However, the linked content further seems to support my suspicion that having websites without any client-side JS is not in the scope of RSCs. The linked RFC, in my opinion, clearly states for it to be expected that a client-side framework and React accept and handle the streamed React response[1]. So while it may be possible to eliminate a lot of client-side JS, at least those would always have to be available on the client, correct?

I would also like to make it understood that I'm not here to bash the Next project, I am simply interested in the technology.

[1]: https://github.com/josephsavona/rfcs/blob/server-components/...

I'm personally curious how the Next is able to achieve the claim of "zero client-side JavaScript" mentioned here[1] using react server components? It just doesn't seem to make sense to me, and the HN clone example and my barebones test project also clearly still load about 74.2 KB of JavaScript. Is the claim supposed to mean that the server components won't require additional JS, or maybe that they won't need to execute any client-side JS to be fully rendered?

[1]: https://nextjs.org/docs/advanced-features/react-18#react-ser...

This is a really cool project. It's unfortunate to see the author being this obviously frustrated by having Sixel-related contributions be rejected time and time again. However it seems like the main Tmux maintainer has shown up on the issue tracker about being open to including the changes upstream, maybe that will improve their faith in the open-source community.

Somehow I don't seem to have the same experience as most people in this thread. Sure, homegrown tomatoes and cucumbers taste quite a bit better than what I usually buy at the supermarket, but it certainly isn't perfect vs. inedible.

Possible explanations I can think of:

1. My taste perception is just broken because I am relatively young and have been raised on low-quality produce.

2. My local supermarkets just happen to stock excellent vegetables (I live in Central Europe).

3. There are some extremely high-quality breeds of tomatoes/cucumbers that I have never eaten before.

4. Other people are simply more enthusiastic about vegetable quality and therefore their claims seem exaggerated to me.

I currently trust Restic with basically all of my long-term backups, which, according to the author, really isn't a thing I should do.

However, I'm still somewhat confident in my strategy as I backup my all of my data to two entirely different repositories, one of them backed by Google Cloud, and another by the server sitting in my pantry. So one of these repositories could get irrecoverably corrupted and I still wouldn't lose any of my data. With cloud storage becoming so cheap I've also thought about adding a third repo.

Of course this would not protect me from a hypothetical bug in Restic that corrupts all my repositories before I notice, so maybe I should also add another auto-backup solution into the mix.

Doing manual things like moving data to external storage seems like a robust strategy, but I really don't trust myself to do something like that nearly often enough for it to be useful.

The interface uses ringbuffers for communication between the kernel and userspace. That's how I have always understood it at least, not sure if it's actually correct.

Just as another data point, I am from Europe and my application was accepted very quickly. Im currently using Hetzner for most of my personal cloud stuff and have been very happy with their services thus far.

> Would you use backtick? Dunno. I hear it’s hard to access on some keyboard layouts like German.

It's fine, you have to press the key right next to the backspace key plus shift. Not exactly ergonomic, but easy to discover on basically any standard QWERTZ keyboard. I'd definitely like a fenced alternative. I'm okay with indentation-based code, but somehow I really dislike using it in my writing.

I get that this is the von Neumann architecture. What I don't get is how not understanding it connects to not wanting WASM or JITs in your web browser.

Note also that the author explicitly mentions they are not that concerned with JavaScript performance and would instead prefer a supposed simpler and easier to understand interpreter.

Fair enough, it seems like we mostly agree on how technology generally affects the world. I can't say I currently possess the domain knowledge to confirm your views on GPT, so I'll just have to hope you are right.

Apparently I also don't? I fail to see the connection you are making.

I see your point, but aren't you making me into a bit of a straw man? When did I say that I was some open-access Luddite who won't use any technology that they can't build themselves. I just like the current state of programming, where I can productively build new and exciting things without having to rely on a lot of proprietary libraries or tools. Nothing more, nothing less.

> If the technical preview is successful, our plan is to build a commercial version of GitHub Copilot in the future.

This may be the first time that a proprietary coding tool offers such a great value preposition that I am actually interested in trying it out and potentially even paying for it. It's also a bit concerning that this will probably be extremely hard, if not impossible, to create an FOSS version of this technology, just because of the immense amount of computing power, and by extension money, needed to create GPT3.

I'm not that comfortable with the idea of a future where proprietary AI-based solutions and libraries (e.g. automatic testing libraries, which have been mentioned here a few times) are so powerful that I'll be forced to use them if I don't want to waste my time.

Note that there exists a spiritual successor to Moment.js in Luxon[1]. The creator was a Moment maintainer and it lives under the Moment project umbrella.

1: https://moment.github.io/luxon/

I've used systemd containers to run badly behaved GUI apps, e.g. Steam and MS Teams on my personal computers. Surprisingly good experience, the systemd manual pages are extremely comprehensive and, in my opinion, much easier to understand than people make them out to be.

It's basically just a nice way of composing the different parts of your system.

E.g. you could write a NixOS module to manage your web app. You declaratively configure that you want to run Nginx, Postgres, etc. open some ports, connect to your VPN and basically everything else you might want. There are a lot of existing modules, so in most cases you have to write very little code yourself. If you want to scale your system to run on multiple systems or containers, you can do that with relative ease.

You also have a singular source of truth for all of your information, down to your application binaries. Your configuration says you are using Postgres version X.Y.Z with compilation options A, B and C, so that's exactly what is running on your systems.

Certainly, I have written you an email to the address used in your GitHub commits. If you no longer use that address, mine should be visible on my HN about.

It seems to me that there are two different kinds of "rational" at play here. It might certainly be rational to accept a religious viewpoint and way of life to make use of the positive secondary effects you mention, but this won't make the core belief (here, belief in a god) any more rational, no? I'm interested in your take on this.

I would guess that network effects and the amount of quality tools built on top of Git are the main reason for its prevalence.

Fossil and Darcs sure look nice, but having to self-host my repositories or use a smaller company that could go under at any minute? Having to use barely-maintained plugins for my editor, CI, CD, etc.? And most importantly, having to explain a completely new set of tools to anyone who wants to work on my projects? In my opinion, it just isn't worth it.

This worked relatively well for my account.

A major reason for my first match seems to have been both accounts talking about licensing issues and specifically GPL. Other matches seem to have shared some superficially similar political perspectives on HN.

I can see how Alpine makes some extremely simple things simpler than React, but it also really seems to restrict me in how I can refactor my website or app. With React I can keep things almost as simple as with Alpine, or move to more integrated solutions (e.g. SSR with hydration) without rewriting much of my existing code. Alpine basically has me stuck with only client side rendering without a lot of optimizations.

The only downside I see is that, unlike with Alpine, a build step is mandatory. However, I assume that any real production Alpine app will also want to include a build step, if only to decrease bundle size. It's such a low-hanging fruit and improves the experience for basically any user.

I get why Alpine is interesting from an idealistic view of avoiding complexity, but React+JSX just seems much more pragmatic to me.

I don't know the specifics of how TinyPilot is supposedly based on Pi-KVM, but seeing how the all Pi-KVM repositories seem to be licensed under GPL 3.0[^1] even distributing his code under MIT seems potentially legally problematic. See the "same license" clause of the GPL 3.0 for derivative projects and projects even just using GPL 3.0 code.

This is of course only relevant if the above comment is correct and TinyPilot actually derives from and/or uses code from GPL 3.0 licensed parts of the Pi-KVM project. I do not know if this is the case.

[1]: https://github.com/pikvm/pikvm/blob/master/LICENSE

Yeah, I get that, but it seems to me like that's worse than the security model for any non-containerized application. If you don't trust the author there really isn't much there that will protect you.

I'm not sure what you mean by non-malicious extensions being intrusive. I use a number of extensions, mostly content-blocking and privacy-related and they mostly just get out of my way. The Firefox Extension Store also has a recommended extensions feature that shows that the extension has been reviewed by Mozilla for privacy and security. Most extensions I use have this seal.

I partly agree, but isn't that more of an issue about children being barbarians than about school being a barbaric institution?

As you say, adults only have control over superficial parts of these dynamics. I'm dubious that they can exercise more control without extensive restrictions on the youths freedoms and in turn their development. So these problems just seem inevitable wherever groups of children or teenagers meet.