Off-topic, but does the Hurd help with the situation with ZFS compared to Linux? My understanding is that the ZFS code is licensed under the CDDL, which is incompatible with the GPL, so it can't be used in the Linux kernel. But if Hurd file system drivers are separate userspace programs, there might not be a conflict, since there is no "linking" or close-coupling with GPL code?
That is a good question, and I got to say i do not know the answer.
From what i have seen Hurd's goals is to actually end up using Rump kernels for a lot of things, and i think that there is a Rump version of a file system that they might be able to use.
This again is just my thinking and I don't know what the big picture plan is.
Right. Sometimes all you need is to edit a couple lines in a config file and get out, in which case hjkl, i/a, and Esc (and then :wq) are all the editor really has to implement. (And a few more movement tools like w/b and so on). Plugins? Colorschemes? You don't need 'em to edit a couple lines in a config file. (I'll grant that syntax highlighting that makes the comments a different color from the actual lines can be helpful, but if it comes at the cost of a much larger binary it's not always worth the cost on those resource-constrained systems).
The original poster wasn't very tactful. But let's see if we can turn some lemons into lemonade. I do think there are a plethora of popular / best-selling "business" genre books that do have the vibe that the OP was hinting at. Reading the book description for "Incorruptible" at Amazon doesn't make me think that this book stands out from that crowd. How could the blurb be rewritten to emphasize that this book is truly different? Just including the sentence "This isn't another book of relavent-sounding platitudes" might help. Are there any falsifiable core principles in the book? If so, could you list those in the blurb? The blurb itself sounds kind of AI-ish:
"Incorruptible argues that this failure is not primarily ethical. It is structural."
...and with at least five em-dashes. Let's assume its not AI, but even then the blurb is very business-esque generic:
"a clear-eyed diagnosis and a practical blueprint for change"
...all sounds cliche. Your comments here on HN make it much more likely for me to read the book than the blurb ever would. But I'm not a best-selling author and maybe this is the sort of blurb that sells books to certain readers? Maybe authors don't have much of a say in how the blurb is worded?
I mean even assuming that this was strictly a 2-layer board, you can still route traces underneath parts like ICs, connectors, etc.. I could believe it was a simple board (for a phonograph and all), but I'd be interested in seeing how well it actually matched. Did he get a new board fabbed and it just worked?
He said that it got a few resistor values wrong, but other than that it was correct. I assume it was actually a single-layer board. (Nobody's doing this with a mini-ITX motherboard.)
I link to it multiple times in TFA and quote the specific thing I'm talking about here in there to explain that possible confounder. I think I've done more than the work I'm obligated to it.do to make all of the relevant information available to you. You are just refusing to use
I am not finding these links in TFA, I see a link to an issue #929 which (as mentioned in TFA) has over 350 replies, and and opinionated summary of what transpired, including some detailed description of specific posts there. However I did not find the maintainers response.
EDIT 2 (and advice on design): The page design changes backgrounds after the results sections, which kind of conveys to the user that they have reached the end of what was is important and can just skim over the rest (usually pages have a radical change in typography like these when you’ve reached the comment section), however this is what is analogous to a discussion in a typical paper, and is arguably the most important part. I had simply assumed that you just left it at the result and skipped the discussion as a stylistic choice.
> EDIT: Found it! it is in the (untitled) discussion section (after the results).
I also paraphrase Tridge himself explicitly saying that this is why commits/releases have increased:
> Essentially, this isn't a "Claude" problem, it's a "more security work" problem, something that Tridge himself confirmed in his response, describing how a flood of AI-generated CVE reports forced rapid, extensive changes to rsync's attack surface.
> The page design changes backgrounds after the results sections, which kind of conveys to the user that they have reached the end of what was is important and can just skim over the rest (usually pages have a radical change in typography like these when you’ve reached the comment section), however this is what is analogous to a discussion in a typical paper, and is arguably the most important part. I had simply assumed that you just left it at the result and skipped the discussion as a stylistic choice.
Good point, I assumed everyone would read till the end, that's on me. I'll give it a heading.
Anyone have a good source to read up on the current state of the art for daytime celestial navigation? Maybe there isn't too much in the public domain, because things like GPS work so well. But I'd guess that since you can't easily artificially jam celestial navigation there would be military research on this. But I suppose clouds also limit the practicality as well.
Obviously my experience is a little dated (graduated high school in 1997), but Shakespeare was a recurring theme throughout my high school English classes. We read The Tempest, Macbeth, Hamlet, and a number of poems, some of which we had to memorize and recite. I didn’t mind the poetry; I still remember bits of the Whitman, Coleridge, and Lewis Carroll poems I memorized. In addition, we read The Odyssey (which felt like torture to me), various Dickens novels, Jane Austin (also torture), etc.
Despite being an avid reader, I did not enjoy all of the above. However, now that I am middle aged, I count myself fortunate that my public school teachers forced me to do it.
class of '23 here. Not exactly a Shakespeare-heavy curriculum, but was made to read Romeo & Juliet and Othello as well as various sonnets in high school.
https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/www-cse-public/ugrad/curr...
reply