wakeupcall

Perfectly understandable. If matrix took off a little more, we might see an increase in resources for the official homeserver, or see more peered homeservers becoming popular (as people today get a gmail account and expect to work with users on offic360 without questioning).

Meanwhile you also have the option to get a client with multi-account support. Again, not all clients have this, but this is again something that no other messenger does, or will ever allow purely for market reasons.

But nobody is forcing you to use matrix.org, and if you have the resources it's easy to run a separate instance with peering, so that you get both the benefits of being able to communicate with everyone and have a faster/locally controlled instance with whatever rules you like.

We're keeping one alive with friends, not because we need it, but because we can and it's easy to do so.

We can argue matrix has not the most fancyful clients right now, and it might not be a perfect solution for everybody, however there are many clients to choose from, you can write one easily with many support libraries, it's easy to script, you can have full control.

This is what we should push for. I've recommended signal to a lot of friends, and I currently feel stupid for doing so: It was a hurdle to convince them, and what I achieved was to move some to another privately run network with arbitrary rules and mandated software controlled by a single entity which is now starting to do random crap.

I used company-provided dell/lenovo laptops for more than a decade. This isn't specific to the 12th gen intel version.

Intel GPU issues on linux were/[are?] omnipresent. Aside from a few lucky generations, for me it always took 1yr after obtaining a new laptop to resolve most of the issues. We go from random suspend issues related to the display not coming up, to massive framebuffer corruption when moving the hw cursor around making the display unusable without workarounds. The biggest issues usually get resolved within the first 2-6 months, but still it's extremely annoying for the absolutely most popular gpu in linux territory, and often quoted as "the best supported gpu" from a driver perspective too. I know intel employs a few full-time employees for this. Far too little apparently for a company of this size. First to get KMS, yet I couldn't ever get opencl working without their own custom/broken driver which is not even part of mesa, not to mention the amount of software that downrights blacklists intel drivers everywhere.

I'm on a T14 amd now. Can't say it's all rosey (it isn't), but I had next to zero issues on the GPU front with vega straight after getting it.

> (eg: projectile vs project.el).

Always curious of why you prefer one of the other. Any major thing you prefer projectile? (only ever used project.el here and was satisfied)

Similarly, I'm using ivy, first time I see vertico which looks similar.

Having alternate implementations is never a bad thing.

I spent some time to get lsp-mode working earlier this year. It took me more time to declutter the amount of stuff it put on screen than what it took to setup. In fact they have a page about this https://emacs-lsp.github.io/lsp-mode/tutorials/how-to-turn-o...

After turning off 2/3 of these, the experience has been stable and supports almost everything. I experienced clangd crashes, but lsp-mode was always able to recover. I'm not too fond of the reliance of treemacs (don't particularly like treemacs behavior in general).

I just tried briefly eglot. It worked right out of the box, and the default "output" on screen seems to match what I left enabled for lsp-mode, which seems sane to me. xref integration seems to highlight methods with cc-mode (lsp-mode doesn't).

Some lsp features are missing. For example I couldn't find an equivalent for "incoming call hierarchy". Not a show stopper.

I would need to spend some good time to see which one provides less overhead, for example.

The github link:

https://github.com/gagarine/no-transition

although it's not the only one (see https://github.com/jnlon/disable-transitions).

Unfortunately it does break a surprising number of websites that just looove animations and in very annoying ways.

I was using https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/no-transition... which operates on the same principle.

You can try yourself it breaks the google login form. You don't need an account to try: just "login", enter a random address, and watch the password prompt not being enabled as it waits for the transition to complete.

Similarly, slack breaks doing random actions that have some blur animation you often don't notice. It's usually always a consequence of transitions and animations that are chained with JS events.

I tried myself to come up with some attributes that would be more robust (just as reducing the step count instead of disabling the animation completely), but nothing has worked in a reliable way.

Count me in as one of the folks that hates animations in UIs, so I would really love to hear if anybody has a solution to this.

Combining signal and sms to have a single messaging app is a big reason as of why I keep using it.

But like many recent developments, I'm just left dumbfounded by their high-level decision making. I've stopped recommending signal to tech persons for a while. I don't want yet another messaging app either. Matrix is serving me well.

Learning more programming languages will make you a better programmer irregardless as it will expose you to different programming patterns, paradigms and the limitations/improvements that result from those.

This is especially true for a popular language, no matter if the language is considered "good" or not. This allows you to understand the libraries/code you will encounter down the road.

I would only discourage one from learning a programming language which is tied to a specific commercial product (most of those just die in the same niche and thus lack the practical utility).

I was using it at that time as my main desktop OS. I ported and wrote several tools of it. The gui itself was simple, nice to use and to program for.

Driver support wasn't extensive, but the available drivers were working fine. With qnxstart.com at the time and all the oss tooling I didn't have anything missing.

I was in love in a way that only beos gave me before.

This was the last commercial/closed-source OS I ever used in no small part due to the license change.

Thanks for the very detailed reply. Evaluating NURBS is useful, but you piqued my interested in the reverse operation. For a moment I almost had the impression we could specify CSG operations based on features extracted from the BREP reconstruction (that would be a game-changer!).

I was looking up at the current docs for the csg->brep conversion, but I don't really see much. Does brlcad actually allow to fit/reconstruct NURBS over the constructed geometry? The export docs still mention IGES export is just faceted.

I'm mostly using openscad and cgal directly, and my experience with both is that model regeneration takes a nosedive for anything non trivial. openscad for example doesn't offer any tool to shoot/analyze rays. The realtime preview also suffers for coplanar z-fighting issues, often making exact CSG operation really hard to debug. However the ergonomics are pretty decent when iterating and constructing geometry on the fly.

Can I ask your role in brl-cad? All your posts are extremely detailed. Are you a contributor? I wonder if I should reinvest time in brl-cad once again.

Isn't Pro/E a b-rep cad?

BRL-CAD is one of the few "full-fledged" CAD systems that I know of which is explicitly CSG, while most (all?) commercial CAD programs are B-REP in nature.

CSG and B-REP are two worlds apart. I'm not sure why in the comments we're suggesting alternatives in the two categories interchangeably. They're not [*].

An alternative to BRL-CAD would be OpenSCAD or libfive studio + other tools (since BRL-CAD does a ton more) and more recently CadQuery. Maaaaybe Tinkercad could be classified as CSG?

CSG makes some operations easy at the expense of other things that become incredibly hard. The same is true for B-REP. Doing gears, highly procedural or FEM-directed models via CSG? Easy-peasy. But try to add a filled between two edges. Step it up 50 notches to fillet one edge and do the equivalent of "tangent propagation". Now the same, but also try projecting a structure on that round face.

CSG's speed is also wildly overblown. While B-REP is not exactly lightweight, computation complexity scales with the complexity of the model but can be sped up by caching intermediate representations.

In CSG this is not always true, since caching the intermediate representation can destroy the accuracy of the final mesh in ways which are very difficult to compute. So even for apparently easy models, times spend walking the space to remesh your model can grow _very_ quickly, hampering the ability to iterate quickly and experiment.

Not to mention, "measuring things" in CSG is hard. This is never mentioned, but none of the tools I've worked with so far offers convenient ways to examine and measure the objects you're working on. For a parametric model this is vital!

[*] Not saying there's no overlap. I'm using both systems. B-REP generally wins on a model which is feature-directed, which is why it's more popular. But I can relate to people that think that BRL-CAD is "hard".

I think the design is brilliant.

Nice 4:3 ratio. This essentially doubles as a full screen you can put anywhere with a keyboard always at hand. That's how I use my laptop 99.9% of the time.

The microsoft book is already better than a regular clamshell in my eyes for versatility, but If you ignore the price for a moment (which brings the book to ridicolous costs), IMHO this design beats a clamshell design in versatility a 1000 times over, and the detachable screen design as well.

I don't have relevant queries at hand as you only notice when searching for specific documentation, however terms often weren't in the quoted snippets, but most critically not in the page and nowhere in the cached content as well (assuming the cache reflects what has been indexed). I could simply search for any of the term and not find it at all. Similar case for Bing BTW.

Assuming this is going to improve, were I would submit an example of this not working in the future?

There is. Look at SearX.

Also a big fan of https://gitlab.com/wavexx/git-assembler (and previously topgit). Works with the basic idea that you can rebuild branches by combining, merging or rebasing automatically on top of others. I frequently use this to build a local branch which is an amalgamation of the main branch + required patches so that I can work (and later submit) on a clean branch without being blocked.

And probably is. Looks like an off-the-shelf industrial arm from the video.

The common recommendation around these powerful automated machines is to stay clear over the entire range of motion. These are difficult to secure even if they have force-sensing features, for the simple fact that it's incredibly difficult to foresee all possible ways you might need these sensors, and the sensing capability might be skewed toward higher forces.

As others mentioned, this arm might stop by default if bumped, but maybe during the downward motion a sudden spike in pressure is expected to be seen to complete the step. Not taking sides here, just trying to explain that the entire concept of "fail safe" is _extremely_ hard to achieve even with apparently dumb moving machinery.

A better solution if people are involved is to design a robot that can always be overpowered. But such structurally weak arm might be quite tricky to move, and probably start oscillating like jello without proper dampening and motion control. Not something I would expect to find or be able to purchase due to the lack of practical utility (besides playing chess I guess).

That things look nicer now is highly debatable. More complex, but just perhaps. How many pages I've seen scrolling on HN showing how the proper "toggle button" needs to work and animate in order not to be confusing where a checkbox still looks infinitely better to me? Or overlay scrollbars, that save essentially no space (which is given to padding instead!!!), hide the position are more difficult to grab?

I still think the W95/Motif-CDE/late Amiga years had very decent UIs even by today standards. Especially on Amiga, everything was expected to be interacted with with minimal latency. Everything was absolutely super-responsive. The UIs were legible, functional, and had tremendous information density.

That is the total opposite of today.

You can have a complete tcp/ip stack and an embedded web server in a 8bit micro using only a handful kilobytes of ram. This is (used?) to be a good way to service super-simple configuration to the user without having to connect through a serial cable and without too many additional parts.

There's absolutely no chance that 8bit can do TLS though, and with browsers refusing to connect without https what is often done in the embedded space is to have a separate mcu which is just doing wifi+tcp+webserver. That mcu is 32bit or better (any of the espressif families for example), often eclipsing the power of the rest of the entire system.

I bought the full set of Pragmata Pro on sale, but I also really like Iosevka. If you like the style (slender/condensed), both are very appealing.

Pragmata Pro is several notches above in overall quality IMHO. Hand-hinting at smaller sizes makes a world of difference if this is important to you. This means you can use the same font from low-res console to a 4k monitor and will consistently look wonderful.

At higher DPI settings, Pragmata has a more cohesive sense of style. This is hard to quantify as it's quite subjective, but as pixel-perfect issues go away, the overall artistic direction start to become very important IMHO. The fact that this is done by a single individual shows in both little details and overall direction.

I'm not trying to push Pragmata, I just want to say that I think the price is fully justified and absolutely worth it. The work that went into the fontset is absolutely huge.

And as I said before, I also like Iosevka. Wonderful effort as well. It's slightly less packed, which I'm not super-fond of, and I find it only really shines if you have a high-DPI monitor. I use the different stylistic sets in my editor to subtly highlight different keywords.

My guess is mostly mobile traffic?

I run a personal tech website containing OSS projects, and have been supporting v6 for more than a decade. Currently seeing few hundred unique visitors per day.

IPv6 has been steady at ~15% of all inbound requests for the past 5 years, with zero signs of increase.

Both my own fixed adsl service and a different mobile carrier do not offer v6, so I have to jump through hoops to verify my server setup.

I did use several smartups ones at 1500VA, and the metal construction was full metal, passive cooling on the interior with ample empty space, nice battery connections. At work we have larger APC racks for server backup and so far we didn't really experience problems. But the larger enterprise sector seems to be quite different than the consumer sector.

As I wrote before, I'm not powering servers and I actually went the route to place a smaller ups close to each load individually to avoid single points of failure and also avoid complicating central cabling. Just because I'm going for smaller sizes it doesn't mean I'm trying to cheap-out, quite the contrary.

For the smaller power lineup, APC definitely is not better than cyberpower in my eyes. In fact, the back-ups rs line is almost twice as expensive as cyberpower and I'm not really satisfied at all. The cyberpower unit has actually sine wave output for the same cost, upregulation works even at very light loads, and it's also a much quieter unit compared to the APCs when idle (when driving load both units buzz loudly). When having several in the same location, this does make a difference.

Opened up, both have the same quality of construction. Which is probably adequate, I guess. But having a metal shield around the battery would have been sensible.

Would be nice to know what other people recommend for UPSs with sine-wave output.

Small APC units are pretty crappy by my own experience as well, especially if you go below 700VA.

I've used several 1000VA back-ups, smart-ups, and while the build quality is generally ok, the trip time for triggering and voltage upregulation was next to useless (passing >500ms). Many back-ups units tend to trigger the differential. The batteries you get from APC itself are just plainly overpriced.

I generally prefer to have many smaller upses nowdays, so I went with a few back-ups rs 500 and two cyberpower (cp900epfclcd).

Upregulation of the rs500 is a joke that you cannot rely on. The output quality is "passable" at best. It's also a pretty basic plastic case, pretty much like the cyberpower. When powered off, it keeps on flipping the main input relay every 10 seconds until it's fully disconnected from the mains.

On the other hand I didn't own cyberpower units for 10+ years like I did for APC, so I cannot truly comment on that.

Can somebody recommend alternatives that truly perform their duty?

After trying microsoft teams, slack feels like a thing from the future.

But try using weechat+weeslack (+ url_hint, so that you can download urls and see images with a single shortcut) as one example of how I consider a chap app should feel.

I remember pidgin being in a similar ballpark, but I haven't used it in years.

It's a shame most other modern chat clients (ripcord, and most matrix clients) do not come even remotely close.

You can now brag that the software is out of support.

Which yeah, doesn't mean absolutely anything for existing software that is still working and requires the old version to run. If by any chanche you need to support that configuration, the "official" deprecation simply means "good luck!" and a pat on the back.

Just like XP, I've seen plenty of shops with custom software that still requires XP+IE6+activex that still get active development, because a total rewrite is out of the question when changes are small (and that is totally understandable as well).

The poor folks though will need to containerize and isolate everything from any network though to keep it somewhat safer. If they do that at all.

I don't know about others, but thanks to a combination of protocols, google and law-enforcement my trust on phones and anything connected to it is basically zero, despite being quite secure on a technical level.

I've started blocking results using ublock last year after it has been mentioned here, and I've got to the point where I have a script I can use to generate the relevant filters for google/bing and a few other search engines.

When I spot any domain which has been squatted by SEO and useless comparison-alike websites I immediately block it. This has brought up the quality of results IMMENSELY.

I'm blocking domains on a _daily_ basis.

It's a very subjective view, but while I do absolutely recommend for every single system to have SPF at the very minimum, I didn't see any practical advantage for spam filtering for newer proposals such as DMARC/DKIM. Any spammer that has SPF enabled, will have the rest.

> It is not. There's still a significant amount of spam that doesn't have SPF, there's a lot of forgery and it's easier to filter if everyone used the holy trinity.

Absolutely. But but again, this will _not_ solve SPAM as the parent implied.

> That's what you see on and from gmail, but it's not the majority of spam.

There's a huge variability on sources, depending also on the class of users you have on your server. However I do keep all copies of spam that could pass greylisting for classification purposes since the early 2010' from various sources and honeypot addresses -- correctly signed spam _is_ the vast majority.

Low-effort spammers are pretty easy to weed out. And while rejecting messages without SPF is still not feasible, it wouldn't _improve_ the ham/spam filtering ratio in my case.

This is fully misguided. Did you ever maintain a mail server and/or check your spam? SPAM is for the vast majority SPF/DKIM/whatever compliant (in fact, my regular email has less DKIM signatures). The joke was always that SPAM was passing all these checks _earlier_ than real email systems.

Why?

SPAM is mostly sent through illegitimately acquired accounts on big-brand servers now. Add a new check? Well, sorry to break it to you, your spam is going to have it too. In fact, on the systems I manage, 70%+ of all spam is coming from gmail itself.

People conflate SPF/DKIM/DMARC with spam checking.. they're not systems to prevent spam. They're intended to prevent forgery.

Realistically, to protect from the dumbest forms of forgery (which is what spam initially was leveraging on), SPF is really all you need.

If a spam email can leave a system configured with SPF, in practice it's already a problem with the organization that let that message out. No system is going to help you with such a problem, and so they're equally useless as spam filters.