I enjoyed reading this post, thank you. The cultivation of attention and thus self care is a significant theme in the work of Bernard Stiegler, which, if you haven’t encountered it, may be of interest.
A fantastic product. A well designed ap from the bottom up and one that, as a student, I find incredibly useful and use constantly. I have made suggestions on future enhancements in the public newsgroups, and shall try and think of me. Just dont forget: naming of sub-pages :-). Many thanks
While I'm not excited by the idea of having a kernel-wide concept of "container", I do love the idea of being able to create a new detached filesystem namespace, mount things into that namespace, and openat and fooat in that namespace.
Very insightful. I like thinking about software complexity and one of the concerns there to deal with complex software is that the design and intentions should be communicated (which means either documentation or exist as a common understanding of purpose and function).
From your perspective, it means that there is also a need to establish agreements on the levels, depth and ways abstractions in the code are formed. Indeed, I worked with software where the functions and operations weren't implemented in a messy way per sé, but the many levels of indirection, abstraction (and obscurement) made things just really difficult to read and a real tail-chaser when it came to maintenance.
Those levels can also make it much more difficult to understand the flow and the operations that are happening, because in many languages you pass references to data objects, so data gets changed in many ways.
Nice article, puts me into thinking mode again! :)
Really neat post. Did y’all consider GenStage or another demand based approach for your overflow problem? I’d be interested in hearing about the tradeoffs between demand vs semaphore, it seems like the two have some similarities.
+1
“I really hope the tech giants start respecting their user’s privacy”
Their business is make money with their users (or used). We must demand a new way to make money, start to think again that privacy matters.
But new generations has been striped of that thought, and it’s hard to change that mind…
Let’s continue offering different choices, different and ethical services…
Greetings
"Fourth, I want anybody else trying to host “the national conversation” to have a clear idea of the risks. If you plan to be anything less than maximally censorious, consider keeping your identity anonymous, and think about potential weak links in your chain (ie hosts, advertisers, payment processors, etc). I’m not saying you necessarily need to go full darknet arms merchant. Just keep in mind that lots of people will try to stop you, and they’ve had a really high success rate so far."
Someone from the commentor community here should do a historical study on censorship like this (not exactly like this, of course, since the internet didn’t exist) under representative governments. Is it rare or unprecedented for voters to polarize into two tribes that will not communicate without the state falling into civil war? Or is it common and just feels like a coming civil war because we haven’t lived a large enough sample size?
Is anyone else increasingly uncomfortable with the "we'll solve the certificate problem by deferring to centralized registrars that surely keep their keys private from state actors."
I mean, this is potentially not a risk if there is a recognizable way of communicating low-bandwidth fingerprints of the next encryption level, like ZRTP verification on voice. But note how WebRTC has done the same thing? And efforts to solve the problem are talked about and then, somehow, nothing ever happens with the standards.
Interesting that the author namechecks novelists, journalists and folk-artists tangentially related to his subject, but in almost every case neglects to credit the designers and publishers of the games in the article, even though that information is printed on the boards themselves and can be read - just - in a couple of the images. Can he explain why he thinks it's appropriate to show respect to the creators of respectable artforms, but none for those who made the objects he's discussing?
While this is a nice hack the usual protections of having patents belong to an non- practicing entity would still work, i.e. this sadly won't work against patent trolls, only against honest companies.
When a city is dominated by one industry, particularly finance, that can spell ruin for its inhabitants. Good for the wealthy and the people in the industry, mediocre for many others. Tech might smooth things out a bit, but there is no reason we need to give anything to a behemoth for coming here. Many are already make NYC home.
Although not the only one, NYC has some of the best universities, many top-tier companies, pools of talented people, and the best cultural amenities. There was no reason to kowtow to a behemoth to come here. NYC is big and innovative, and it will stay big and innovative for the foreseeable future. Tech was here before and will it be here after, without being dominated by a single company.
Facebook has always made it almost impossible to delete anything.If you don't delete your activity on facebook every day,you have a buttload of stuff,including all comments.You can go to activity log and you have hundreds of comments,you can delete them one by one.That can take months because they make it hard to do even that.Who cares what you commented on three years ago ? Much of the activity log can not be deleted at all. My activity log gets deleted every day so I don't have years of crap on there.People have been complaining about this for years,but facebook doesn't care.They just want everything they can get about you to make money off you.
"However, this system is vulnerable to a very simple threat: a dishonest seller can make a copy of a real bottle with a token, fill it with wine of lower quality, and either steal you..."
The argument around “someone that doesn’t care about tokens” is weak because that applies to any authenticity solution.
The idea behind the authenticity guarantees would be that every step along the way, you add a record that the object has passed through your step. Otherwise I agree this won’t work.
If someone adds a record, but does fill the bottle with cheaper wine, the first person that catches them will blacklist that actor.