How to compile and run this? We need a build system! Download and install GNU Make.
When that step is complete:
Type in
make hello
and its done. Now, run via ./hello
See, Too much magic (didn't even have a makefile or Makefile), no standard library, Too constricting, cryptic, too basic. And, because you had to install Make, too complicated. Hits every one of your objections.
One snapshot would help because, if EVERYTHING collapses, and you need data recovery, the snapshot provides a basepoint for the recovery. This should allow better recovery of metadata. Not that this should EVER happen -- it is just a good idea. I use Jim Salter's syncoid/sanoid to make snapshots, age them out, and send data to another pool.
I agree that ECC is a damn good idea - I use it on my home server. But, my lappy (i5 thinkpad) doesn't have it.
Either the journalist writing the article was using Dutton as a source accurately, or Science is not a reputable source of news. This is mutually exclusive.
I took the story prima facie. And, if the story (journalism) is accurate, Dutton is indeed suffering from hubris. Someone brought up the collapse 100,000 year ago in a direct comparison. It was either Dutton or the journalist. If I take Science as an accurate source, it was Dutton. Or it was not Dutton, then Science is not reputable (are they adding implications and misquotes?). If that is the case, why the HN story? HN curated it (that is, HN readers) so I have to give credence to Science magazine (because I give credence "to the crowd of HN contributors"). Again, both sides cannot be argued at the same time.
As to reading the summary for policy makers: the IPCC is a political organization, not a scientific one. Why would its publications that are for policy makers be of interest to me? I need a condensed version of science, not policy. The IPCC doesn't have anything to do with the claim -- (except CO2 causes global warming which the IPCC doesn't actually claim, but does imply, as best as I can tell). Either Dutton made the claim, or Science made the claim -- they have to back it up and defend it. I made no claim EXCEPT that Dutton is suffering from hubris. Which I just backed up and defended.
I do wish that was a reasonable argument. Closer: I drive a "Model Z". In the past, someone discovered a crushed Model Z. Does driving a Model Z more than 50 mph cause crushing?
"The new octopus genome data, she adds, “is pretty convincing evidence that a full collapse happened.”
The findings reinforce the importance of understanding how modern climate conditions are affecting the West Antarctic Ice Sheet, Dutton says. “This is telling us that we need to take this bigger picture seriously.” Continued ocean warming—driven by greenhouse gas emissions—could destabilize the submerged portion of the ice sheet. To lower the chance of another collapse, she says, “We can’t just kick the can down the road and wait to make emissions cuts for another 5 years, another 10 years. It really demands that we do it now.”
Emissions in the modern sense were not the cause of this. But, it happened. Is Dutton making the claim that emissions are the cause now? I'll accept all of Dutton's claims, except that one; there is no basis for that claim. Lower the chance of another collapse? By how much? Would that have actually helped 100,000 years ago? I make the claim that Dutton is suffering from hubris.
thanks -- I was under the initial impression that you intended jeeves as a "pythonic make". make isn't a command runner at all. Indeed, it relies on sh for that. It determines the DAG required to bring components up to date wrt dependencies. For example, you may have a postscript file and a pdf. Edit the postscript and you want the pdf regenerated:
my.pdf: my.ps
<tab> command to convert my.pdf to my.ps
Make makes no attempt to generate scripts, or anything like that. In general, make uses file timestamps to determine that my.pdf is out of date with respect to my.ps Make does have default commands that it can use. For example, it knows that executable w can be generated from w.c If I have a directory that contains w.c I can:
make w
cc w.c -o w
Now, because w exists, and is newer than w.c doing make w again does nothing!
I will show how Make hits every one of your complaints:
(sarcasm on)
in file hello.c:
How to compile and run this? We need a build system! Download and install GNU Make.
When that step is complete:
Type in
make hello
and its done. Now, run via ./hello
See, Too much magic (didn't even have a makefile or Makefile), no standard library, Too constricting, cryptic, too basic. And, because you had to install Make, too complicated. Hits every one of your objections.
(sarcasm off)