skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
Cloudflare's new homepage – not everyone needs Zero Trust/Connectivty Cloud?
Quite confusing homepage for those who just need a web protection from DDoS.
I didn't say that everyone should do it. I only started this about 3-4 years ago, and it was always working before that. I just like having a clean OS.
Good for you.

One failure report is worth 1,000 success reports. Add as many orders of magnitude as you wish, and the statement remains true. This is not merely an axiom of reviewing and assessment, it's a joke:

https://xkcd.com/937/

I've been reviewing tech for a living for nearly 30 years now, and evaluating tech for a living -- as well as using it and fixing it and deploying it -- since the decade before that.

The point of tech assessment and tech reviewing is to balance the good features against the bad features. Too many people get dazzled by the good stuff so that they don't notice the bad stuff.

As the late great Douglas Adams put it:

«
In other words - and this is the rock-solid principle on which the whole of the Corporation's Galaxywide success is founded - their fundamental design flaws are completely hidden by their superficial design flaws.”
»

I don't care how good the features of a filesystem are if I can't trust it. Either it needs to be very solid, and have good documented battle-tested tools for fixing it and repairing it, such as XFS or JFS... which probably means it is also conservative on the features.

Or, alternatively, absolutely blasted bulletproof, to the extend that a multi-billion-dollar corporation sees fit to launch it without a repair tool because it doesn't need one.

There is one such system, and it is ZFS.

Btrfs is neither. It is loaded with features, some half implemented if that, it is fragile, and it does not have good repair features.

If I had seen it fail once, I would be dubious and sceptical.

If I had seen it fail twice, I would no longer trust it.

But I have not. I have seen it fail half a dozen times in 4 years.

And it is not just me.

Here is the documentation on the repair tool:

«
Warning

Do not use `--repair` unless you are advised to do so by a developer or an experienced user, and then only after having accepted that no fsck successfully repair all types of filesystem corruption. E.g. some other software or hardware bugs can fatally damage a volume.
»

Source:
https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/btrfs-check.html

Here is #1 corporate user SUSE's:

«
WARNING: Using '--repair' can further damage a filesystem instead of helping if it can't fix your particular issue.
»

Source:
https://www.suse.com/support/kb/doc/?id=000018769

In corporate terms, this is an admission.

This tool cannot be trusted and that it is present means that the FS cannot be relied upon.

This is a giant red flashing light and eardrum-bashing warning siren.

It doesn't matter how many people like it and have had no problems. THERE ARE PROBLEMS. It doesn't matter how many corporates use it. A broken tool may still be usable.

Meta may deploy Btrfs across racks of kit but they don't care about the data on those racks and it can be replaced.

Fedora doesn't use snapshot support because it's bodged that functionality into OStree so it doesn't care if it's dangerous. It just wants to describe how horrendously inefficient Flatpak is.
>But life is not fair and it's not going to happen always.

The world would be a much much much much much much shittier place if everyone accepted things and never pushed back.

>Not being able to accept that shows immaturity.

I find not being able to accept that other's have a different but equally valid approach to life shows immaturity.
Got a used mini 2 a few months ago and know what you mean. Thing is for the $200 I paid it's ok. I likely would feel bad with a $1000 machine.

It's picture quality is amazing and it's fun to check caves in the mountains and possible paths before going them. Also more advanced travel selfies are fun.

I don't use it when many people are around, so that would highly limit it in some places for me.
I mean the maintainers fix really does look better... op can and is credited with finding the bug because and that literally is all he did in concern of the code that ended up in the kernel. If you look at the initial commit and the linked stackoverflow answer I understand that the maintainer was hesitant to merge and wrote a clean implementation of it. Not even going into the "laying words into someones mouth" shit he did.

He found a bug (even that is questionable because it got reported prior), copy&paste-developed a fix and is angry that it doesn't get merged and now throws a hissy fit that he got attributed with the exact thing he did. Looking at his employer makes this even funnier.
A product having once been ubiquitous, and it's maintenance therefore common knowledge that you'd pick up by habit, does not mean it's stupid to have to pay attention to this knowledge many decades later.

Some misconceptions do exist, for example dish soap not usually being a detergent that damages the patina nowadays. While other practices are a development, like our general food hygiene standards having changed significantly, and keeping a patina on cookware therefore requiring more deliberate attention.
There are many grid battery technologies common on right now, liquid metal battery, IronAir battery and many more. And all of those have lots of 'orders' that they brag about.
So what you're saying that you're putting your own home-grown script wrappers from local machine to production deployment scripts?
> Is it so wrong for people to want to feel appreciated for their work?

Is it so wrong to not be awarded a medal everytime someone does something?

The title says "I got robbed", the reality is the solution has been discarded for something the maintainer, who's going to maintain that code, liked better.

The handling wasn't great, sure, but the real appreciation comes from within, from knowing you found a solution to the problem, not from others.

It is like going to the doctor with the solution and being upset if the doctor replaces it with something he can trust
From what I understand, the correct time stamps are maintained in the EXIF data when you export from Google Photos, and you can use tools like exiv2 on Linux to set the file modification timestamp to match the EXIF one:

exiv2 -T rename image.jpg

I don't think this is Google being actively malicious, but just file systems in general handling dates in a confusing way.

You can easily encounter exactly the same problem e.g. if you are copying images between systems with an external USB drive and you are not careful about how it's done. E.g. Windows Explorer will change the date to "now" if you do a simple copy, to avoid this you need to use "robocopy" or do a move instead of a copy.
Comparing both patches, I see a clear difference. While the contribution from the linked article changes the behaviour of both branches of the if...else, the final contribution changes only the parth in the "if" branch.

I guess, the maintainer had some reason to change the code. Nevertheless, giving credits to the original patch author would be appropriate since the actual fix was almost 100% copied.
Wish for extra features is not the same thing as crush the free market with the arm of government.
It is a bit brave to upgrade every 6 releases or every 4, I prefer to have smaller issues more often than big ones rarely.

But I get that most of the time the issues is with dependencies that upgrade to lazily (that's why I don't like those that are bytecode magic and don't use ASM).
Why was the Apple privacy change so severe to making "the Facebook/Instagram/TikTok to Shopify connection ... dead in the water"?

I understand a bit about digital marketing, but not why this was so bad...
That and being a kernel developer is for the most part not all that glamorous. For me whenever I ended up sending a kernel patch it was because I uncovered some bug while working on a larger userspace project.
You can install Safari separately.
The point of subliminal messages is not about if you can consciously notice it or not. It is about imparting something you do not expect to your subconscious. A single frame of a can of coke in a movie is not generally noticeable but it was proven to have a clear effect.

Your mind filters out more than you realize. But only to reduce the burden on your consciousness. Somewhere deep inside, something is still processing that crap ton of data and it knows more than you and can definitely influence the conscious you.
Typically you would have different arenas for different lifetimes ('per frame', 'per level', 'per game session' - or maybe even more specialized, like the duration of an IO operation), and 'reset' the arenas at the end of their respective lifetimes (which is basically just setting the current 'top offset' to zero). This sort-of expects that object destruction is a no-op (e.g. no destructors need to be called).

The general idea being that you don't need to track granular 'per-object lifetimes', but only a handful of 'arena lifetimes', and all objects share the lifetime of the arena they've been allocated in.

Of course it's also possible to manually call a destructor on an object in the arena without recycling its memory, but I heavily prefer using plain POD structs without owning pointers and which can be safely 'abandondend' at any time without leaking memory.
Just repeating my comment from a recent DSLR/film thread [1]:

I don't shoot film anymore since about 15 years, it's totally not worth the hassle. However, I did stick to this mindset of first trying to figure out whether it's worth it overall and only then taking a picture (except when shooting plants/insects for later determination etc, then different metrics come into play). It has a lot of advantages for me, mainly because I really despise what the OP also does (shooting pretty much everything, taking x rounds of the same scene then figuring out the best one). Instead I end up with a sort of pre-curated list and then go through it once to delete what wasn't a good shot or turned out to not evoke any emotion whatsoever when seeing it again. Sure, I might miss something somewhere, but that still hurts a lot less then the mind-numbing and time-wasting alternatives.

tldr; I can get a strong feeling of attachment, but it takes a really good picture or a certain subject, preferrably the combination, before that feeling kicks in. And then I do get back to look at them, because it's worth it.

I did in the past try to not do that and just keep a lot more pictures, but it just feels boring to look at them.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37369490
We can call it “exerting their power in unrelated markets” as well.
When do you think they will go public?
I can see both sides of the issue. The kernel maintainer is within their rights to implement their fix and accept it; they probably work with this codebase a lot and have to deal with issues that crop up. If the added code doesn’t match up in some way, they should be free to fix that.

But this issue could have been handled better. The kernel maintainers should have better attribution mechanisms. At least share authorship in the commit so the patch sender gets credit and is incentivized to contribute more. Its so easy to do that and it can create so much goodwill for little cost.
There is a data field to store that information: who contributed a change. Writing your name instead of the actual author seems wrong and I wouldn't blame him to feel unrecognised. I agree it's probably not a big thing but remains a valid feeling in that situation.
GitHub supports Co-Authored-By[1]

It is probably something the kernel guys (and similar projects) should use generously in examples such as your own to encourage involvement

[1] https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/committing-changes-...
> finally

Systemd had dependencies between services and containers since forever.

The only difference here seems to be podman instead of systemd-nspawn.
> A minority of programs inherently require general purpose allocation, at least in part, that linear allocation cannot fulfill. This includes, for example, most programming language runtimes

Interesting definition of "minority"
It seems he did get credit in the ‘Reported-By’ tag.
I'm not a lawyer, but wouldn't having customs block BOOX imports into the country be quite feasible?

Probably need to get the SFC or similar to ask a court to issue some kind of judgement about it.
Dover Strait Coastal Guns
I have not found any solution that even approaches Google Photos. That is: a reverse chronological feed with shared and private albums around events or interesting sets.

Google also identifies people and pets which is useful but not terribly reliable. Search works reasonably well which gives a forth avenue for accessing memories.

I do love the automatic retrospections which solves the problem of photos being stored and never looked at. That's the fifth avenue.

Finally, integration with maps gives you the ability to find photos from a given area. Even though it relies on simple meta data from the photo, this does not seem to be replicated well anywhere else.

Overall, I am very worried that Google removed the option to buy additional storage for legacy Workspace and don't know what to do when I inevitably fill up my current subscription.
One thing that wonders me. The patch contains a fix but obviously no unit test that verifies it. Is that the standard of linux kernel development? In the company I work for, the patch would certainly be rejected because of that.
Someone spent 5 days debugging and giving the explicit details of the problem and a proposed solution. They should be given some credit, even if the exact lines of code that fix the problem weren't the ones proposed. The maintainer could've just given the feedback required for the contributor to submit the desired patch. Or some metadata on the commit could've offered attribution to the contributor. From the article, this was 90% the work of the contributor and 10% (maybe?) the work of the maintainer. Considering that being mentioned as a contributor to the kernel is a Big Thing, completely neglecting to give any mention is poor taste.
Until everyone moved out of Apples store due to the Apple tax and you have to go explain to non-techies how to avoid spam and malware.
> Is there a reason for all that noise and complexity?

No. It's just Docker being shit.
Because often they find ways around the "suffering", e.g., just marketing the hell out of bad stuff and making money on it anyway by getting eyeballs on it. See: Netflix, Amazon, etc. content farms for example.
Everything in life is about golden star stickers
If only these drive-by contributors would be around to maintain the stuff like secretaries that would be a dream. As it is, I think you may have the roles reversed: the maintainers are not there to merge your patch and look after it in perpetuity.

The entire purpose of these responses is to repel the drive-by contributor who invariably generates clerical work for the full-time maintainer. It's just a sad fact about the nature of this work that it's often done by volunteers who are massively overloaded, and "contributions" are often so minuscule or low quality that they are actually just additional time-demands on already-overworked maintainers.

There is a good book about this:
https://www.amazon.com/Working-Public-Making-Maintenance-Sof...
Got a used one for $200. Many people just have it collect dust at home :)
Personal secretary was sarcasm, "personal coding assistant" would be more accurate.
That doesn't give credit for 5 days of debugging. It gives credit for raising the issue, which was already done, six years prior.
How would that be a bad thing? All that would mean is users get the best of both worlds, so yes please.
compared to ...?

the secret of a happy life is trying to be happy, whatever that means to you, and making it, the secret of a sad life is trying to be happy and failing at it.

regardless of the expectations.
> Not everything in life is about getting a golden star in your grade book.

No, but being a kernel contributor could affect his job prospects in the future.

One of the prides that I can discuss in job interviews are my contributions to upstream software stacks (mostly PHP frameworks such as Laravel and Magento). I have had a patch rewritten by a maintainer that arguably made the patch worse - that left a very sore feeling for me and I think that it was the very last patch that I sent to that particular project (Wordpress, which I am glad to be rid of).
Exactly the opposite, actually.
> has been taught as though it was a proven fact to generations of physicians all over the world.

Welcome to healthcare. For many conditions having a medical degree is straight up deleterious to a doctor's ability to accurately diagnose and treat a condition.
Not everybody is able to constantly keep on reinventing themselves.
But that's only credit for finding the bug, not fixing it. He put quite a lot of work into fixing the bug, and that credit got stolen by someone who merely rewrote his fix.
“Sorry boss, I can’t open the email and attachment you sent, because MS and Adobe both decided they need to side load their apps, and I’m not about that on devices I use”

Yeah that’ll go down so well.

I need you to understand that orgs will abuse their standing and power, regardless of what users want. At least in the existing walled garden setup, they’re forced to at least try and behave.
> Higher energy densities are mainly nice for things like high end sports cars where the form factor prevents cramming in more battery. But less so in freight trucks. Saving a few hundred kilos of mass on a truck that pulls 80 tonne is just not that valuable.

Disagree. Car and truck makers try to optimize for grams and saving a kg of production vehicle is considered a huge engineering victory. Saving 100s of kg is a gigantic deal.
Sorry that is terrible phrasing. You don't understand why doctors act in a dismissive manner that seems mean.

Rephrase it and it becomes the start of a solution. What should happen in a patient doctor interaction where the doctor is not able to reassure a patient that the prescribed treatment plan is the best plan.
In Machine Learning conference papers, a common approach is to model relationships between variables using Graph Neural Networks (GNNs). Using GNNs is a powerful and flexible way to go. Maybe you can give it a try!
Ohhhhh…. I was looking in the Safari documentation. Thank you! Didn’t know about this!
Tell HN: When I first read the Htmx website I thought its from 2005
> VictoriaMetrics is a layer on top of Prometheus from a quick read.

Sorry, but you're wrong!
VictoriaMetrics was built from scratch with own ideas [1][2][3] and never was build on top of Prometheus. Yes, it use some libs which are used in Prometheus/InfluxDB/othe open source projects but thats all. More over VictoriaMetrics team has created own query language, named MetricsQL [4] which is inspired by PromQL [5].

> I managed simple alerts just using Prometheus's alert manager and aws's simple mail system, I prefer this simpler approach.

In the VictoriaMetrics stack, alerting is placed in a separate utility - vmalert [6] that is responsible for alerts and works with alertmanager as well as Prometheus.

[1] https://faun.pub/victoriametrics-creating-the-best-remote-st...

[2] https://valyala.medium.com/open-sourcing-victoriametrics-f31...

[3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-DbbIZzFHIY

[4] https://docs.victoriametrics.com/MetricsQL.html

[5] https://medium.com/@romanhavronenko/victoriametrics-promql-c...

[6] https://docs.victoriametrics.com/vmalert.html#vmalert
> Being opposed to technology is something I don't understand.

TFA article is about how Luddites were not opposed to technology per se.
I'd be pissed if I put in a lot of effort revising my contributions to a project, only to be told at the end that "I like my version better, so go away!". This is not how a project reliant on community efforts could sustain itself.

I always thought a project as big and respected as that of the linux-kernel would have folks who know better, and look out for the best interests of teh project while respecting new-comers. After all they were new when they started contributing?

I dont think anybody in their right mind would advocate for a "not best" solution to be accepted just because a new-comer brought it. The right thing to do would have been - "Here, I have reviewed your patch. This and This are troubling because of this reason. I'd recommend re-writing this like that. Tell me if you need assistance with this, and I can help write that part" and co-author such a patch. That's how you get a good pipeline of future contributors who also care.
Do it in a semi-public place as well. But no cameras.

Make it embarrassing.

No criminal record. No jail time, which costs a lot of money to tax payers. Just an ass whooping.
I can’t empathise with the author. It seems like they’re only interested in OSS when a) they get credit, and b) for only fixing problems that affect them.

> instead he implemented his own version of the fix. I told him that I would really appreciate if he could accept a patch from me, so that I could receive credit for fixing this issue and become a kernel contributor.

In other words, you asked a maintainer to accept an inferior fix just so you can put “kernel contributor” on your resume.

> My company and I should have received proper credit for solving this issue, especially considering how much effort we put into it.

No one asked you to do this. You aren’t owed anything when you do an unasked favour for someone else. Also, the only reason you put so much effort into this was to fix your own problem. Which, from my understanding, is now fixed. You seem to have no interest in fixing other problems (which you were given an opportunity to do). IMHO this attitude doesn’t qualify for contributor status.
I don't remember where but this is pretty common knowlage in urban design and transport engineering. Any textbook on road engineering should have that stuff.
In many professional situations, that would be like telling your boss you don't feel like using Teams or Github or AWS, because you don't agree with their business practices. Or telling your clients.

It's not a Vim vs Emacs vs VS Code choice.
Because it opens the possibility for folks to get duped into installing something from a different app store that could lead to all sorts of problems. I am thinking about less sophisticated users like my boomer mom and aunts and uncles who if you're a nerd like me you're often the relied upon first line of tech support.
Free Cybersecurity Awareness Course for SME's
We're launching a free cybersecurity awareness campaign for employees. Our goal is to make them more familiar with existing threats, so they can better protect them, and your business as well.
If this course is well-received, we'll continue to extend it with practical information and guides to create a safer work environment.
We'd love to hear your thoughts!
For me it seems to be.

I have used the free compressed photos option the whole time and one day I was suddenly many many gigabytes over limit.
In 2016, Star Simpson turned some of Forrest Mims' circuits into beautiful PCBs that integrated his hand-drawn schematics and descriptions. [1]

During this period, she gave talks about the value of aesthetics in PCB design that I loved. I think her ideas about aesthetics apply way beyond electrical engineering. [2]

----

1 - https://www.crowdsupply.com/star-simpson/circuit-classics

2 - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eost2IbQ6mg
I still remember him in Ultima: Savage Empire
After some googling, looks like the answer is: it depends :) E.g. in this article (https://showbusinessinsights.com/2014/06/24/the-most-stunnin...) 5 of 6 boxes are in the middle, the only one at the side being from a British theatre. So maybe this is more of a British tradition? I guess both have their advantages and disadvantages - at the back the occupants have more privacy and a better general view, at the side it's easier to build a separate entrance, and the box is closer to the stage.