bisby @ bisby @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

226

Joined

2 yr. ago

It's a nice tool to have around anyway. Even for my windows VR PC. The power at my house went out yesterday and the base stations restarted into a fully on state. I didn't have to turn on the VR PC to turn them back off, just had to open Lighthouse PM.

You're right, it's very likely he wasn't intending to use a slur. But it seems to me like a lot of the reporting is "he didn't mean to disrespect people!" when that's not the case. The pope's intentions were absolutely to disrespect people, just by his actions, and not by that specific word. the specific phrasing he used to do so doesn't really matter.

the pope had made the remark while reiterating his position against gay people becoming priests.

It doesn't matter what word he used, he was using it in an anti LGBT sentiment.

The 87-year-old pontiff was reported as saying that the Catholic seminaries were already too full of .. gay men.

Here, I removed the slur. This isn't any better. Italian fluency wasn't the problem and didn't change his argument.

I hate how these things always come up because "order of operations!" It's mostly people who are bad at math remembering one topic they struggled with and finally got right, and now they know it's a touchy subject so it will drive engagement. It's the modern equivalent of "Mathematicians hate this one secret for solving equations! Click to find out!" Pure engagement bait.

But in all the engineering ive done, things never really come up like this. If there is any potential clarity issues, parentheses would be used, or it would be formatted in a way that makes it much more clear.

40 - (32/2), or 40 - ³²⁄₂ has no clarity issues imo. You don't even have to think about order of operations because 32 halves is a number on its own. it isn't an "operation" to do necessarily, it's a fraction to reduce.

And yes, I get the joke. The joke is making fun of the engagement bait of "some people will get the order of operations wrong!"

Is 1/2 in base 13 not 0.65?

IMO it doesn't matter. People don't read news on updates. Should they? Yes. Do they? No. Should they have to? Also no.

Linus's point is to never blame the end user for something the kernel changed. If you want software to have widespread adoption, adding homework to simple updates isn't how you do it. People don't want a hobby or something to babysit, they want an operating system. Debian will go out of their way to make in-release updates go as smooth as possible, but are willing to through out entire parts of functioning packages between releases.

But this isn't even about breaking things for the end user. This will create excessive amounts of noise on the upstream repo. People will say "Hey! My keepassxc broke!" and they report it to keepassxc, and not to Debian. To which keepassxc just has to constantly reply "no, debian changed this on you, this is not a bug." If Debian had to deal with the fall out of their own decisions, I would say "yeah, im not sure if i agree with the decision, but oh well"... But they are increasing the workload for other teams.

It is already happening. The debian dev's stance is "This will be painful for a year." But it will be painful for keepassxc, NOT debian. The keepassxc devs asked them to not do this. Debian's response might as well be "Im inflicting this pain on you, even though you've asked me not to. But on the plus side, it won't hurt me at all and it will only last a year for you." If they really have that much disdain for the project, they should just stop packaging it altogether.

So yeah, debian has the legal right to do whatever they want because keepassxc is open source. but "just because I can, and you cant legally stop me, and its extra work for you, not me" is kind of a jerk move. This is what drives FOSS contributors to get burnt out and abandon otherwise good projects.

It'll also break all your keepassxc plugins soon. Because debian version to version compatibility is not a priority. They also don't care if them breaking something triggers a ton of upstream bug reports, because it will only "be painful for a year"

Linus for the kernel has a strict "don't break userspace" policy, and Debian has a "break things whenever you want, and just blame the user for not reading the news file" policy.

Definitely make sure you think through all the physical security implications of having your house automatically unlock in any scenario.

Have the house auto unlock when getting home on a bicycle, sounds convenient until, as you point out, they could get stolen and now the thief has a convenient way to unlock your house. So you would not want that.

You would definitely not want the house to STAY unlocked when something like a tag is in range. If your kid is home alone, you want them to be able to re-lock the house (or in general, you want to be able to lock your house while the kid is home).

Whatever solution you wind up with, you are going to be trading physical security for ease of use (and complicated fun task). Be safe. Make sure the tradeoffs are actually thought through and worth it.

Hard to unlock the house based on media playing if the kid is outside though.

Oh look. Debian changed the keepassxc package and now the keepassxc repo is getting all the bug reports for it. Their stance is "it will go away in a year or so"

Regardless of whether or not it is a good idea, it's undeniable that Debian makes a lot of decisions that negatively impact their upstream. And since it's someone else's problem, oh well.

There is a reason upstream repo maintainers wind up angry about problems that someone else caused.

too lazy to type this obvious thing in?

This has been the thing for me. I get really bored and lose focus when doing all the obvious repetitive stuff. And the obvious stuff is the stuff I find copilot does best. For anything that requires thought I'm engaged. Those are the fun parts of the job. It lets me do more of the fun part.

The one major downside that I've found is that sometimes I just want to tab complete a long variable/function name, and because of copilot i dont have "old style" tab completion anymore. (I could definitely still handle this myself, but i haven't)

edit: this all to say that I don't use copilot to write code that I don't know how to write, I use copilot to write code that I've written 1000 times before and don't want to write again. Copilot does a good job of looking through all the open files for context to help make sure the suggestions actually fit into the codebase's pre-existing style.

In pineapple express they call it "the dopest dope I ever smoked"... But I now realize that movie is almost 20 years old.

Hopefully "we're still trying to learn what's best for PC" isn't some sort of code for "PC players are too whiny and won't bend the knee, this weekend was bad PR that wasnt worth it. we just won't release future games on PC"

A lot of people don't know this though. They think it is the "won't fall over" type. They hear "use debian over ubuntu, because it's more stable" or "use debian for servers, because it's more stable" and think it means "You want uptime, so you dont want something crashing". So when they see a bug, it is concerning to them. A distro focused on not falling over must super care about reducing crashes, and don't realize the exact opposite is actually true. The bug was fixed a long time ago, but you don't get it because "don't change" is more important than "don't crash".

If the bug is in a popular package (ie, a super common screensaver) in a very popular distro (and a lot of people have chosen the distro because they think it has less bugs than others), I can imagine the maintainer getting fed up with the bug reports for a bug that was already fixed.

Most people I've seen on Lemmy understands that "stable" means "unchanging"... But every person I've talked to outside of lemmy, thinks it means "less bugs". So clearly it's a very big misunderstanding (Which is basically confirmed by the fact that xscreensaver gets so many invalid bug reports that they felt necessary to do this.)

If you received constant complaints from users about bugs that you had resolved years ago, but package maintainers refused to package, you'd probably get sick of it too.

Daniel Stenberg (author of curl) has blog posts about how everyone in the world uses curl, and as a result include the curl license in their readme, which means he gets mail from people upset about their car not working.

Steam had a big thing recently because the snap of Steam is not official. But yet, they get a TON of bug reports for things that are only broken in the snap.

I imagine having the same conversation of "That bug is already fixed as of 8 months ago" "Well how do I install the latest release?" "I dunno, talk to your distro about that" on a super regular basis, it starts being something that is incredibly infuriating. No one wants to take the anger of aggressive upset people, especially when the fault lies with someone else. He has asked Debian to stop shipping out of date versions of his software in the past. But because open source, they are not obligated to, so he has very limited ways to protect his own interests.

Your issue sounds like it's with Debian for shipping incredibly out of date software and putting jwz into this position in the first place and not with jwz.

This is a daily reminder that "stable" means "unchanging" and in no way refers to the quality of the code. It doesn't mean "won't fall over"... That's a different type of stable which debian stable absolutely does not guarantee.

A bug in debian will remain present in debian until the next update a year from now. If the bug breaks your workflow, then find a new workflow or a new distro.

I had the same reaction originally though, because I feel like I had seen this previously as just "bending" the list of 1-100 in half.

    
1+2+3+4+...+49+50
100+99+98+97+...+52+51
=
101+101+101+...


  

101 * 50.

So you have to do a bit more thinking to define your equation but the equation takes you straight to S instead of 2S.

And since the meme just has + ... instead of showing where the end of the list was, I see how one could easily mix up the 2 approaches.

I use wayland, but be warned that there are downsides.

X11 is 40 years old. Which means that even though it has 40 years of bad decisions baked into it, it also has 40 years of features and tooling built around it.

And in some cases, things are purposefully broken in the name of security as mentioned above. Writing a keylogger on X11? Easy. Every app can watch the keyboard even when they aren't in focus. So if I type my password into firefox, Discord can listen. Hope you don't have any malicious apps just patiently listening to all your keystrokes.

Getting rid of input listening sounds great! .... Except for the concept of global keybinds. Have a Push to talk button in discord that you need it to be able to listen to while youre playing a game? Sorry, the game is in focus, so discord can't see ANY of your input. Including the push to talk button. Different wayland servers have different ways of handling this with their portals. Some don't have it at all. And the ones that do don't always have great solutions.

One major issue that has been in wayland debate hell... how do multi-window apps communicate with each other. For example GIMP. The editor window is a separate window from the toolkit which is a separate from the layer view. GIMP on X11 knows where all of its windows are because it can see everything. if you wanted GIMP to save all the window positions, it could. GIMP on Wayland has no idea where each window is relative to each other. Each window knows its own size and shape. And thats it. It doesnt know where on the screen it is. Which means it doesnt know where it's other sub windows are relative to itself. Which means GIMP on Wayland can't really save the window positions for next run. Wayland is working on a protocol for handling this, but its been caught up in debate hell last I saw. This is a prime example of a thing X11 had. And Wayland will someday have, but the 40 year headstart and disregard for security gives X11 a huge headstart.

Most of these problems have workarounds and solutions, but you might find yourself in a situation where you do in fact need to implement a workaround instead of having everything Just Work.

"Better" means different things to different people. Architecture and security and technologically? Wayland is better. Just Works and its what your apps were probably built to run on so less weird edge case issues? X11 is still better just due to inertia. (And again, I use Wayland, I'm willing to deal with the workarounds, but you do you).

What exactly? That they're moving to zero hour contracts

This isnt what the headline says though. "Discovered zero hour contracts" isnt how normal people speak. I have no clue if a mass teams call means they discovered some people were already on contracts, or that they were moving everyone to them, or some people, or (not knowing what a zero hour contract is) that the company has new contracts with game publishers.

You took your own understanding of the headline and even in your "its simple" added details that weren't there originally.

Sorry, my phrasing of "not how it works" is more about willingness from the lender side and not "allowed" to. He couldn't even get a bond for for the reduced amount without going through a shady company. He's certainly not going to get 4 bonds.

use two or three surety companies, each taking, let’s say, a $50 or $75 million piece to total up to $175 million.

Even with split up bonds to reduce risk in a normal situation, the bonding company is going to assess risk based on the full cost of the bond. They personally only have to put up less money, so the "how much do i lose if everything goes wrong" scenario is less, but "how likely is it something goes wrong" involves "the person on trial for lying about finances doesn't actually have enough to cover the full bond, so perhaps that increases the odds of me getting my money back"

Why would you throw away $50 million dollars. It's "less risk" only because it's less money. But if you think he's shady enough that likely you never see the money again, then why put up any money, especially if you have to compete with others to get the payout.

If someone said "You can gamble $50 million or $400 million. If you win you get 5%, but the odds of winning are only 10%, and if you lose you only get back $10 million." You would obviously opt to gamble the $50 million. You want to lose less money. The payout isn't worth it given the odds. If you were then told "oh, you can just opt out and avoid the dumpster fire of a deal", you are going to choose to opt out. No amount of "it's less risk" will make this a good deal for a bonding company.

So yes, syndicating the bond is an option, no smart bonding company is going to touch this, which means even with syndicating it will be hard for him to find enough incompetent, shady, unlicensed bonding companies.

And to be clear, this is not me arguing in favor of why any amount of money was unfair to expect Trump to acquire. This is me pointing out why he's never going to get the money from legit sources because he's a financial dumpster fire, and they should just throw the book at him instead of continuously going easy on him.

edit:

But with Donald Trump bragging that he has $500 million cash in the bank, combined with the other assets we know he has in real estate

Trump bragging about made up numbers don't make anyone more confident about his assets. Both the value of his assets and how much stake in those assets is actually his is a thing he notoriously lies about. He's even been found guilty about lying about his finances I think.

If he actually had that money money just in the bank, none of this would be an issue, but the thing is... it's not true.