oarsinsync

Debian’s debate page can be read at https://wiki.debian.org/Debate/initsystem/systemd

Both of those things existed in the early 2000s, but if the risk of a loan can (appear to) be shifted onto someone else, banks can and will issue bigger and riskier loans to people, and will reward the individual people selling the loans personally.

  zfs wait <poolname>

Gives me the benefit of automatic fixes in the event of bit rot in any blocks more then an hour old too.

Because it’s insecure to use on multiuser systems, as it presents an opportunistic access to remote systems for root users on your local system: root can read and write into your UDS too.

As a user, you have to explicitly opt into this scenario if you deem it acceptable.

“Liberal” is used to refer to one part of the political spectrum in mainstream American discourse.

Sun Microsystems were also big in universities. As were IBM. Lots of people believed the "servers have special hardware" voodoo back then, and parroted that it's bad news to run servers on consumer hardware.

Somehow, decades later, the meme refuses to die. Unlike Sun Microsystems. Or IBM's Unix server business.

Blink terminal for iOS and iPadOS. Ships with vscode support built in too.

I think that means either:

  * they have revenues of $3.4b/year just from the $100 annual fees, or
  * some decent percentage of people have signed up for a free developer account and then never done anything with it (like me)

Very few developers today care about resource usage and resource management. Very few developers even understand that there’s something there to care about.

> Ah yes, Microsoft, the defenders of the free world.

No, Microsoft, one of the few businesses in the world that has both the technical ability, and the financial muscle, to be able to develop their own browser engine.

Who still chose not to. Leaving us stuck in the duopoly of Apple and Google, even outside of our mobile phones.

There are plenty of parents who have absolutely no sense of this, and plenty of children who have a better sense of this than their parents, because they’ve had to learn the hard way.

Choosing to reproduce, or failing to use birth control, should not give you an extra vote.

> We actually spent considerable amount of time just developing our own custom protocol

Not only is this unintentionally hilarious, it’s a real life example of an xkcd comic (https://xkcd.com/927/) that will never cease to be true.

> eventually all our data communication would use a single unified protocol from micro-controller to IoT Linux to cloud data-ingestion pipeline to database.

This, however, is remarkably impressive, that you were able to build a single protocol that fit this end to end use case.

> But any time you try to write them down, people will come along and interpret them to their own advantage, sometimes outright in the opposite direction.

I think this a feature/bug of a (litigious) society that works on the letter of the law rather than the spirit of the law.

Former Apple Music user here. I switched because of Spotify’s collaborative playlists. Technically, I could have used a sync solution to sync changes between platforms. In reality, it was just cheaper all around to switch to Spotify instead, and be on the same platform as my partner and friends. Being able to open Spotify links being sent to me without having to run it though some translation shortcut was wonderful.

Apple deleting all my playlists immediately after my subs lapsed was the icing on the cake to never return.

Meanwhile Apple is unable to manage to identify its own customers in its home jurisdiction.

My bank is able to verify me remotely to login to their app from a new device in under 15 minutes, just with a photo of my ID card and a video of my face. And the bank is liable for any losses caused if they misidentify me.

Why can my bank do it but apple cant?

The GP is suggesting to talk about the problem, rather than “the owner blew all the cash on blackjack and hookers, screwing the rest of us in the process.”

The recommendation isn’t corporate speak, the recommendation is to focus on talking about the problem, not the people responsible for the problem.

If you’re going somewhere that isn’t NDA heavy, you can speak in general terms without violating the letter of your NDA and it’ll be fine.

If you’re going somewhere that is NDA heavy and has a culture of corporate secrecy, demonstrating that you will not pierce the veil of your NDA of your previous employer at all, neither in letter nor in spirit, will actually help your prospects.

Rarely, you can do all that extra work and get meaningful improvement that justified all the effort. It does happen. Sometimes it presents itself in the form of a severance package.

This sounds a lot like the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 in the United Kingdom, where several people have been prosecuted and imprisoned for failing to provide encryption keys.

I’m curious about where are you seeing what Mark Monitor requested? It doesn’t appear in the official status update. Is this public information formally posted somewhere we can all see?