Well, from the description I gathered the service was going to “TURN (existing) scripts INTO internal tools”. Not “provide a front-end to a framework where you write brand new code to integrate with your business logic”… The first mode seems to add a relatively large amount of value for relatively low effort given the management scripts that already exist. The second seems more like a framework only useful for processes you spend the effort to migrate. Was hoping to see a Rundeck competitor but got an Internal competitor instead?
See if you can determine that for yourself by e.g. reading the second paper as far as the first sentence of the second paragraph and then looking at the publication date.
That seems like a ridiculous thing to say. That said, I actually came to the comments to wonder just how much total effort would have gone into this from proposal, through approval and sign-offs by multiple technical and non-technical teams, before finally getting through to production. Anyone have an educated guess? I’m really curious even though I don’t believe it should sway opinion on whether to do it or not. The value is spread across employee morale and however many millions of users have their day brightened a little.
Did I misread something or is this just a well known existing protocol combined with yet another DIY centrifuge?
It seems to me that the cheap spinny thing part of this is long solved (Paperfuge). What we need is to make the chemistry reliably foolproof. This fool (me) doesn’t even recognize all of the units they use in the paper.
“That evening, a group of 30 to 130 men, some dressed in the Mohawk warrior disguises, boarded the three vessels and, over the course of three hours, dumped all 342 chests of tea into the water. ... The property damage amounted to the destruction of 92,000 pounds or 340 chests of tea, reported by the British East India Company worth £9,659 worth, or $1,700,000 dollars in today’s money. The owner of the two of the three ships was William Rotch, a Nantucket-born colonist and merchant.”
Oh definitely. Almost 30 year Emacs user here. When I saw what was happening with productivity leaps like swiper and helm, and Spacemacs working to make Emacs look nicer without turning it into another CUA+TEXTAREA also-ran, I called it the Emacs Renaissance!
A lot of times I’ve noticed people arguing that some nice thing in Emacs “could be” implemented in their chosen editor. I think they underestimate the value difference between that and “has been” implemented.
> this will be combined with a 32bit userland, for the reason mentioned above. - the amount of work needed to update all the libraries that talk to the GPU.
Seriously? If my phone makes any kind of noise and/or presents any text or other media that I have to look at and/or dismiss then it is not enough spam filtering for me.
It so happens I’ve been thinking a lot about the debt analogy recently and decided that the simplest improvement is to think of it as an interest-only loan.
Sure, that balloon is just sitting there, but every single day you don’t pay it down, you are still paying interest. It slows you down when it causes confusion, when it makes integration more difficult, and when everyone is afraid to make improvements that might require changes to That Godforsaken Class.
And if instead of paying it down, you decide to add more debt, then the interest payments go up / the drag just gets worse.
And let’s be honest, arguing that tech debt is not bad comes up way more often over adding more than deciding not to start paying down.
Sent my Apple Pro keyboard through my dishwasher last week! Hadn’t been cleaned in probably 8 years so in addition to looking almost brand new, it now types significantly better.
When I worked for a CS department long ago, I took all the Sun Type 4 keyboards home in batches of 6 to run through my dishwasher.
I would never do it to a board unless I was really sure it was completely unpowered when disconnected, and waited days for it to dry.
There are lots of other caveats depending on the exact keyboard and exact dishwasher model.
My idea is to extend fennel-mode with a fennel-hs-mode that will take preprocess code by removing newlines[1] and wrapping in something like
fennel.eval([=[ (code) ]=])
and then sending to the hs cli.
I haven't done much yet; this is the first time I've tried to write a real Emacs mode. It would be much nicer to have a real Fennel REPL integrated in Hammerspoon, but the above would be enough for things like eval-last-sexp and org-babel-eval.
[1] Sadly, the hs cli does not handle multi-line strings.
I really recommend the paper referenced and the whole idea of calm technology. I was inspired enough by LavaPS and the paper that I implemented a similar model for a Program Visualization course project back in 2000 or so, and brought the idea back when working on monitoring for my first web ops job in 2008!