ongy

5 ms·

31.
by ongy 8mo ago
Which probably also relates to DB pricing. Being flexible with DB is expensive . Getting somewhere at all is generally cheap. Getting somewhere at a reasonable time is usually ok~ish priced. But being able to just take any train? €€€
32.
by ongy 8mo ago
Hopefully cartel regulation would prevent Microsoft from using their market leader position to force partners to remove all support for competitors. But I'm losing hope with those.
33.
by ongy 9mo ago
I think a large part of this is about how a branch is expected to be used. Branches that people are expected to track (i.e. pull from or merge into their regularly) should never rebase/force-push. Branches that are short-lived or only
34.
by ongy 9mo ago
That point is not reached during packaging though. I prefer rebasing git histories over messing with the patch quilting that debian packaging standards use(d to use). Though last I had to use the debian packaging mechanisms, I roundtripped
35.
by ongy 10mo ago
It's about getting a clear statement form the US government that this can be ignored at no risk to them aiding in enforcement. I.e. peace of mind. Not just for the large~ish (questionable in various ways, as the lawyer points out himse
36.
by ongy 10mo ago
jubernetes?
37.
by ongy 10mo ago
Low stakes (IP violations etc.): absolutely High stakes (military / nation state scale): no
38.
by ongy 10mo ago
Do you have a link to research pointing at antidepressants being no better than placebo?
39.
by ongy 10mo ago
ok, I'll bite. What's the git product that only carries the name?
40.
by ongy 11mo ago
IMO the interesting bit here isn't the specific technical change but the interpersonal one of overriding the maintainer(s) decision. Thus the title reflects the most interesting bit of the story.
41.
by ongy 11mo ago
Oh yea, this is "srcfs the idea" but not "srcfs the project". I.e. this isn't something battel tested for hundreds of thousands of developers 24/7 over the last years. But a simple commercial product sold by pe
42.
by ongy 11mo ago
No. `/dev/shm` would just be a build in `tmpfs`. Though from what I gather form the story, part of the spedup comes from how android composes their build stages. I.e. speeding up by not downloading everything only helps if you don
43.
by ongy 11mo ago
While it looks like at least some of the team are ex-googlers, this isn't the srcfs we know from piper (Google internal tools). Looks like it's similar in some ways. But they also don't tell too much and even the self-hosting
44.
by ongy 11mo ago
Or having a quick chat with the delivery guy/neighbour while remote.
45.
by ongy 11mo ago
Who said anything about security? They are toys
46.
by ongy 11mo ago
Why do you think it's fear? The owners I know consider it a convenience device.
47.
by ongy 1y ago
Huh, that way of doing asynchronicity is quite interesting. Though my Haskell and Rust primed brain really dislikes the way ownership of the memory allocation for the response struct works. It gets allocated by the caller (library), handed
48.
by ongy 1y ago
why do you assume the full ethernet header? IIRC. cut-through only needs the first 6 bytes. Since it only needs the destination address for the port lookup. Potentially the first bit, on broadcast.
49.
by ongy 1y ago
But you get * 12h time * Sunday start of week * Silly pyramid mm/dd/yyyy
50.
by ongy 1y ago
> export LC_TIME=en_US.UTF-8 Why would you do this to yourself?
51.
by ongy 1y ago
That's not fractional though. Proper fractional, 1.11 is smaller than 1.3. In versions, 1.11 is larger than 1.3
52.
by ongy 1y ago
But the offline enabled property allows exactly that. Both sides type offline and only sync later. Neither would like their change to just be discarded.
53.
by ongy 1y ago
What does 'bucked' mean in this context?
54.
by ongy 1y ago
> In Go 1.24, we are introducing a new, experimental testing/synctest package Clearly a mature mechanism we'd see in large companies...
55.
by ongy 1y ago
I do. That's why I have a browser render it to a format that makes sense for human consumption. Granted, html actually makes sense in the xml-ish (I don't remember if it's technically compliant), since it weaves formatting in
56.
by ongy 1y ago
Yes. A sane schema that actually encapsulates the data would be a lot easier to read. Earlier I had only seen the mix of values in body and values in tags. With one even being a tag called "value". Thanks for showing more examples
57.
by ongy 1y ago
EAD does indeed look like a good example of why we shouldn't use XML.
58.
by ongy 1y ago
Calling XML human readable is a stretch. It can be with some tooling, but json is easier to read with both tooling and without. There's some level of the schema being relevant to how human readable the serialization is, but I know sign
59.
by ongy 1y ago
You are making two assumptions that are generally not true * In the US * Interviewee is currently unemployed Even then, the general candidate we interview for Tech positions can usually survive quite well on a couple months.
60.
by ongy 1y ago
At best WPA2. WEP is broken in ways that don't need human fault. The only downside of TOTP to FIDO and friends (from a security perspective) is phishing resistance

More ›