This is a point I've been discussing for a while but never to my knowledge gets brought up in the mainstream Trident debates.
Another point is the two test failures in a row recently.
Regardless of the stance on whether we should spend so much on Trident I think most would agree if we are spending we want it to work, and be able to maintain it ourselves.
Extremely incorrect. Nationalisation of water polls as a remarkably popular policy with a clear public majority in favour, even among exclusively Tory voters. As does rail.
The lack of movement on the issue is not due to lack of public will, but the lack of desire from a dying government to deliver effective policy.
Which is borne out of electoral choice. It hasn’t been the will of god that the Tories have been running the show unopposed for over a decade - it has been the will of the public.
Renationalisation of water may be popular now, but when everyone was promised cheaper water bills in the 80’s, it was an absolute tub-thumper for thatcher - same for rail - people seem to forget how much British rail was a national symbol of hatred, and the fervor with which privatisation was embraced.
No, this is public will, and governments that realise that by doing whatever idiotic thing the public is demanding today to retain and grow power prosper - at least for long enough for the cabinet to all line up a very comfortable retirement.
By the time the consequences come along, enough time has passed that it can be blamed on literally anything but any of the people responsible, from politicians who implemented it to voters who voted for it.
There seems to be confusion as to where the sewage issue has originated - while it may have manifested relatively suddenly, the circumstances have been building through policy and voter apathy for the last 35 years.
I get the points about not needing a formalised system for diagrams, even if C4 is quite light touch in my opinion (I never go down to the code level).
However, I do have to credit structurizr, which outputs C4 diagrams, as a great productivity boost. One model producing multiple views at all specificities is fantastic compared to mermaid, plantuml, etc, where every diagram needs to be self contained and define and redefine the same components over and over. Branching off, editing the model, presenting ideas, has been a very successful workflow for me.
I’ve only tried structirizr briefly, but I found it too inflexible. No way to draw concepts that aren’t strictly part of C4. For example I wanted to encapsulate 2 components in a box to represent that they’re currently deployed as one service (not necessarily a good thing to do in absolute but would have helped my team to grok it better): impossible.
I do like the idea of describing architecture formally, but the lack of customizability of diagram output was too painful
I don't have the full context of what you're trying to model, but "two components deployed as one service" might be better represented as a container. If that's not the case, you can use the "group" concept to group components together -> https://docs.structurizr.com/dsl/cookbook/groups/
Alternatively, https://likec4.dev provides a way to create an arbitrary number of abstraction levels (although I wouldn't recommend such an approach).
Plus one for structurizr. Its model driven approach makes it a lot easier to keep the diagrams consistent with the code: You describe the architecture, and structurizr renders the diagrams.
Mermaid's definitely not well-suited for the amount of text and text formatting that C4 requires. You can do it, but you will be jumping through hoops, and the autolayout breaks down pretty quickly when the arrows between boxes get chatty.
That might be dependent on the library then, there isn't an official OTel Go logging library yet. Seems you have to add the trace ID exemplars manually too
Go is behind several of the languages in OTel right now. Just a consequence of a very difficult implementation and its load-bearing nature as being the language (and library) of choice for CNCF infrastructure. If you use Java or .NET, for example, it's quite fleshed out.
One would hope that there will not _be_ an Open Telemetry logging library for Go. Unlike last time there was a thread about this, there is now a standard - `slog` in the stdlib.
I have never tried a TRX and good luck on your journey.
I would like to add for others, you can go from 0 to pull-ups with just a bar, which I imagine is much cheaper too. I certainly did and my fitness level was minimal.
It's a case of progressions. For instance starting with negative pull-ups:
- Use a stool or just jump to the top position of a pull up
- lower yourself down with control, as slow as you can. At first this might be 1 second!
- Repeat for sets and reps
- when you hit 3 sets of 8 reps, slow down your descent another second or two
- Repeat until you've built up to 10 second reps, 3x8
At that point you should have the strength to be able to do a pull-up. You may need to ease into the technique, if so, introduce a resistance band to help train the motion, and gradually reduce your dependency on it.
> you can go from 0 to pull-ups with just a bar, which I imagine is much cheaper too.
How is a bar cheaper? It's a solid thing that needs to be attached to something solid. A TRX is just a strap you can hang on a door. (I actually want to attach mine to a wall or ceiling, which makes it a bit more complicated, and at that point, maybe I might as well go for a bar.)
Just today I was lamenting the lack of Document Provider APIs on Cryptomator Android, I'd like to use it to encrypt my Obsidian vault. Alas the issue is locked and the milestone keeps shifting.
Another point is the two test failures in a row recently.
Regardless of the stance on whether we should spend so much on Trident I think most would agree if we are spending we want it to work, and be able to maintain it ourselves.