Microsoft is a strategic risk for everybody, looking at their track records the last few years.. I don't love Linux, but I like it. It's no-bullshit. It doesn't always do everything perfectly, but it has the right mindset. It doesn't want to screw me over.
The market is perfectly efficient, value is well attributed, lobbying is a social good, being rich means you’re smart and should have special privileges, optimizing for returns on investment is equivalent to optimizing for a better society
Americans often confuse socialsim for handing out money freely and letting people commit crimes without going to jail, both the left and right, so its this wierd catch 22 going on or something
The actual problem is how do we give people things that are way more expensive than those people will ever be able to cover themselves?
The answer is to make someone else pay for it. But man, have you ever gone to dinner with your large tech salary and been advised you have a moral obligation to cover 80% of the table's bill, and then be demonized for scrutinizing what people ordered?
Socialism is great when you can get yourself to believe that the government is a bottomless money pit fed by evil people with infinite money harvested from captive forced labor.
Capitalism is great when you can get yourself to believe that the lives of people who cannot carry (or did not carry) their weight don't matter.
I think you’re a magnitude or two off in the current state of wealth inequality. It’s more like people are asking you with a 400k/yr salary to pitch in to buy candy bars and you’re upset someone picked out a king size for fifty cents more.
Socialist policies would be decidedly less popular if people knew that most of the money to fund them would come from middle and upper middle class earners.
While those people as individuals have nowhere near "billionaire" money, they as a contingent have the most wealth.
While the "1% have more money than the bottom 50%" is true, they have less than half the money of the 70%-95%. America's cash cow is in the suburbs, not the Hamptons. Kinda forbidden knowledge to know that.
Insane binary choice fallacy. The choices are more akin to centralised control or free-ish markets. We see from experience how centralised control has completely butchered healthcare, both in the US and also my country of Canada. It's time to drop the insane authoritarian control and let people freely chose their own destiny, so to speak.
There are benchmarks in there, and comparisons with all the other watchers out there I could find at the time I made it (see "Comparison with Similar Projects" at the very bottom of the readme).
It's a pretty long list. Tons of watchers out there with different design philosophies and shapes of problems they solve.
There are a lot of caveats to the filesystem monitoring APIs provided by kernels. Some projects (like facebook's watchman) take that as a kind of antagonism, and decide to fight back with layers and layers of fallbacks and distrust and rescans. That projects basically only makes sense as a daemon.
Other programs and libraries try to take that complexity and tame it by being super-focused on one platform or providing a lot of configuration options.
Some provide debouncing logic. This particular feature comes up from time to time, I believe, both for practical reasons and because over-reported events from the kernel subsystems, especially for some arcane events like moving a file across mount points can trigger a flurry of hard-to-associate events for the same path.
If you want to avoid dealing with under-documented filesystem event subsystems, you can also just make your own with ebpf. Especially for security-oriented systems, you'll find that the only (nearly) perfectly accurate filesystem event subsystem you can make, is the one you make from the ground up.
This is cool stuff, but a nitpick: It’s not undefined behavior in the language sense in C to do socket ops on a bad file descriptor. It’s just an error from the kernel’s point of view, and the kernel will throw -errno at you.
Yes it's not UB, but the consequences are not limited to a EINVAL/EBADF/EBADFD. Calling close twice is essentially the same problem as calling free twice, so you get all the use-after-free problems on your file descriptors.
Think the world would be a better place if 70-80% uptime were more tolerated. We really don’t need everything available all the time. More time to talk to each other, to think, more “slow time”.
Some of these I’ve been told are taboos in the opposite way. For example, the one about serving or taking food from the opposite end of the chopsticks, I was told, is polite. But here they say it is taboo. Maybe they meant it’s taboo not to do that?
Yes, it’s weirdly ambiguous. But even that is performative, as you’re still using an unsanitary part - the part that has touched your hand vs the part that has touched your lips.
You do NOT want to use the opposite side of the chopstick. If you use chopsticks correctly, you shouldn't be touching other food you don't intend to take. Also if you are with company that you're close with people care less about you touching the food, but otherwise you'll want to use a serving utensil.
reply