One man’s trash is actually that same man’s server, now

I was referring to Clipchamp, not the OS

Because it’s a “free” piece of software so you are the product and therefore they want you to agree that they can harvest and sell your data

Right. Given the option I will always choose to work with a decent programmer who can communicate well and documents their code, over a very strong programmer that doesn’t think they should waste time with documentation

As long as “cleaner than you found it” also includes “better documented.” I’ve worked with people who think that “the code should speak for itself” to the point that they will make biased decisions with no explanation or documentation and then if you ask them about it after their response is “look at the PR for how that decision was made.” I’m not going to git blame and find your PR to find an outcome from an argument between two people that after scrolling just says “sometimes the API returns a JSON string here instead of nested JSON so we have this conditional” when that could be a comment

What the heck’s this Gatorade. We got Brawndo. It’s got electrolytes

Looks great, thanks for sharing

Random recommendation, but I recently stumbled upon https://monaspace.githubnext.com, and it seems like a pretty cool approach to the whole “monospace font for dev work”

Lol the out of memory error was a joke. A reference to that two people both trying to do the same thing will fill the heap since there’s unnecessary work.

I tried to make a code joke but it failed.

As far as what are they unwilling to release? Control. Ownership of any bit of the kernel they control

kernel maintainer Ted Ts’o, emphatically interjects: “Here’s the thing: you’re not going to force all of us to learn Rust.”

Lina tried to push small fixes that would make the C code “more robust and the lifetime requirements sensible,” but was blocked by the maintainer.

DeVault writes. “Every subsystem is a private fiefdom, subject to the whims of each one of Linux’s 1,700+ maintainers, almost all of whom have a dog in this race. It’s herding cats: introducing Rust effectively is one part coding work and ninety-nine parts political work – and it’s a lot of coding work.”

It’s a whole different ballgame. I’ve written a good amount of C and C++ in my day. I’ve been learning Rust for a year or so now. Switching between allocating your own memory and managing it, and the concept of “Ownership” https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch04-01-what-is-ownership.html is just something many devs set in their ways aren’t willing to do.

I understand where they’re coming from, I’ve gone through massive refactors with new tech in my career. I think this approach needs to be more methodical and cautious than it is, but I don’t think they are correct in the end result. I think a memory-safe language is the way to go, and it needs to happen.

This to me is a classic software project with no manager and a bunch of devs arguing internally with no clear external goals. There needs to be definitive goals set over a timeline. If someone doesn’t agree after a consensus is reached they can leave the project. But as of now I think as others have said this is 80% infighting, 20% actual work that’s happening.

Ironically the majority of the rust memory management ruleset is called ownership, and they are unwilling to release any of it, and claiming all of it, so there’s an out of memory error.

But on the other hand you can’t expect some smaller and smaller subset of the population to primarily just learn C and meet the criteria of a kernel dev.

I absolutely agree with all your points, and most rust devs would agree, but the general idea is that over time that energy (which would have been spent tweaking malloc and such) should be spent on the rust compiler and memory management systems, which is already magic as someone who as written a lot of c, c++, and spent the better part of a year learning rust. (I’m no expert of course, but I have a pretty decent grasp on the low level memory management of both the Linux kernel and the rust compiler).

So that over time the effort that would be spent on memory management and kernel functionality can be properly divided. Rust not being efficient somewhere in catching memory faults or managing memory? Fix it. Someone writing unsafe rust code? Fix it.

I think at the end of the day everyone wants the same thing which is a memory safe kernel, and I think that rust Is being shoehorned into kernel projects too early in places where it shouldn’t be, but I also think there is unnatural resistance to it just because it’s different elsewhere to “how it’s always been done.”

micro has some improvements and default shortcuts that are much closer to common GUI text editors

https://micro-editor.github.io/

Got it, I’m in the US and a YouTube premium subscriber, so that could be the factor definitely

Oh strange I still see it as an option

Wonder what the qualifier is to show it to a user

I meant no feedback when you report something, not that there is not the ability to report something

I̴͖̿ ̴̉͜l̵̫̆i̵̠̊v̵̫͠ē̷̱ ̷̛̥î̸̢n̸͓͐ ̴̻̔a̷͗ͅ ̸͕͌"̵̝͐f̵̤̀i̸̢͐r̶̮̄ś̴͙t̶̫̚ ̸̠̉p̸̰͗a̷̙͒š̶͚t̷̪́ ̸̧̚t̶̳̕h̸̤̋ẽ̸͓ ̸̨̅p̶̣͠ō̵͖s̵̖̀t̵̬͠"̵̮̆ ̸̟͂c̶͉̒o̷̧̽u̷̙̓n̸̮̈t̶̫͝ṙ̶̬ý̸͙ ̵̯́ť̵̨h̸̻͊a̸̙̾ț̵̀ ̴̬̈́f̴̲̉ò̶̩r̷̯̕č̵̲e̷̩͐s̵̥̽ ̷͖̾à̵͍ ̵͂͜t̷̫͛w̵̮͑o̵̢̍-̶̦̓p̵̬̈ä̸̳r̶̼͝t̴̺̄ý̴̡ ̶̧̒ŝ̶̲y̴̪͆s̷͎͝ẗ̶̤ḙ̶̎m̴̯̂ ̶̠̌a̶͇̋ṅ̵̡d̸̦́ ̷͈͘p̴̺͝ȅ̶̟n̸̙̓ä̵͚́l̷͙̚i̵͈̓z̶̩̅é̷̖s̴͎̉ ̷̧͘v̶̪͛õ̵ͅṭ̵͗i̷͙̾n̴̼̔g̶̛̟ ̵̥̕ỷ̷̡ò̷̹u̵̬̚r̸͓̓ ̶̼̓c̸̩͑ȍ̷̲n̴̞͆s̷̰͗c̵̖̏i̶̥͊e̸̝͆n̴͉͋c̸̜̅ẹ̷́ ̴̝̍ṵ̶̋ṇ̷͝l̸̯̉è̴̙š̸̖s̴͎͐ ̴̲̐ị̴́t̸̹͐ ̵̬̀a̵̮̓l̸̺̈́i̵̬̒ģ̸̚n̶̻͂s̴̠͂ ̷͖̚w̷͙̆ì̷̺t̴̳̔ḧ̴͕́ ̴̣͂ő̷̡n̸̫͠e̷̥̿ ̸̧̒o̴̞̕ḟ̵͖ ̶͖͝t̸̖̃h̷̕͜ǫ̵̎s̶͉͆ẻ̵̙ ̷̨̓p̸͎̏á̷̭r̸̹͊t̸̻͗i̵̫̓ȩ̶̀s̶̹͝.̶͔̄ ̷͙̉Ẅ̷̘́h̷̤̽i̸͙̊ḽ̸̔ē̸̡ ̸̟̈́t̷͐ͅh̵̜̑e̵̗͊r̷̲͋ĕ̶̝ ̵͕̏m̵̬̑a̷̯̽y̴̡̔ ̶̹͂b̴̨̕e̴̺̚ ̴̖͠f̷̯͒l̸͚͒a̵̤̽ẃ̸̺s̵̲͠ ̶̮̏i̸͎̓n̴̘͊ ̸͓̄Ṙ̶͍a̴̘͆ṅ̷͔k̸͕̕e̶̟̅d̶̦̐ ̵̩̓C̵̛͎h̴̯̅ò̶̪i̴͇͑c̵̯͐e̷̡̎ ̶͚͗V̴̺̈o̸̩͒t̸̘̉ĩ̸͚n̴͓͋g̴̙͐ ̵̹̑t̷̪̏h̴͍̀ȁ̶͉t̸̟̒ ̸͎̌c̵͙̓o̷͎̎ú̷͇l̷̝͗d̶̹̃ ̸̛̪e̶͍̊m̷͚̌ë̵͔́ṟ̵͝ġ̸͉e̷̱͊ ̴̱͝į̵̋n̷̳̊ ̵̐͜f̴̠́r̵͔̊ȉ̶̻ń̸͔g̵͈̎e̵͔̓ ̵̻͝c̶̈́͜à̸̧s̴̘̅e̵̦̊s̴̩̉,̵̛̬ ̷̻͊í̴̡t̷͇̽ ̷̨͋ỉ̷̝s̷͙̅ ̵̖̍s̶̨͗o̸̗͌ ̵̧̐ỏ̸̟b̸͕̕v̴̻̓i̷̳̋ö̸͇́u̴̬͗s̵͙͑l̶̛͕ỵ̸͒ ̵͚͠ś̸̤ů̵̱p̸͈̊e̶͓̍r̴̗͛ỉ̶̦o̶͓͂r̷̡͝ ̸̩̏t̴̜͗ō̵̲ ̸̹̓o̸̞͂ù̸̜ȓ̵̺ ̸̱̀c̵̗̿ū̸̢r̶͓̾r̷̢̔e̸͇͠n̷͚̐ṱ̸̾ ̵͎̈s̷̋͜ẙ̶͙ș̴̑ṱ̶̓ē̶͉m̴̪̒ ̵͇̅ẗ̷́ͅh̸͉̄a̶͔̅t̵̘͆ ̶̪̿ǐ̵̬t̶̻̆ ̵̥̈ī̶̪s̴̚ͅ ̴̻̕ḥ̵͆a̸̔͜r̵̭͠d̸̲͝ ̸̨͌f̶͉͛o̴̹̊r̶̙̚ ̷͙͐m̷̪̋e̸͓͝ ̶̮͌t̷̺͊o̸͙̊ ̶̡̚w̵͍̅o̷̥͌r̷̠͆r̷͈͌ý̵̦ ̴͙̄t̸̝͂ỏ̴̥ŏ̷̲ ̷͔̈m̷̡̏ű̶̘c̶͎͐h̷̻́ ̴͕̈́ǎ̸̹b̶̡̃ọ̷͒ủ̸̟ẗ̸́͜ ̴̖̒t̶͖͛h̴͈͛e̶̫̅ ̶͎͝n̸̥̎u̶̹̎a̸͔͐n̴͓̎c̵̻̔e̸̹̐ ̶͇̐o̴̝͌f̶̖̚ ̴̙̓ḣ̶̹o̶͍̚w̵̻̚ ̵͓̂í̵̻ť̵̡ ̶̧̈́m̴̥̓i̴͉̅g̵͎͂ḧ̸͓́t̸̠̃ ̵̻̂ṋ̶͑ő̶̗t̷̥͂ ̴͉͊b̷̦̊e̴͇͐ ̷̾ͅ1̵̝̀0̸͇̈́0̷̳͑%̶̠̀ ̶̖̎p̷̙͠e̷̗͒r̷̪̀f̸̭̏é̷͜c̴͎̓t̸̛̖ ̴̯̄1̵̡͑0̴̻͠0̶̬͑%̷͍̐ ̸̢̛o̵̤̽f̷̞̒ ̷̲͋t̸̨̒h̵̠̀e̷̦͝ ̴̢́ṫ̵̟i̸͎̇ṃ̴͌è̵͚.̸̫͐ ̶͘͜Ą̸̈n̷̜͋y̷̜͒ ̸̱̈́(̶̣͆d̷̪͆e̸̖̕m̸͈͠o̴̬̿c̶̹̆r̵̩̈́á̸̜ẗ̴̗i̷̯̔c̷͛͜)̵͈̌ ̸͎͑ṣ̸̚y̵̢͠s̸̞̀t̵͖͊e̸̛̲m̵̼͘ ̴̤͠i̷̗͘s̴̟̄ ̴͖̈́b̸̧̒ë̶̹́t̶̤̑t̶͔̉ë̷̪́ȑ̶̲ ̸̩͒t̴̼̀h̶̲̉a̴̒͜n̴̖͂ ̸̙̃w̴͚̒h̴̳̒a̷̫̔t̷̲͝ ̷̘̈́w̵̨͗ē̵̝ ̵̻̏h̸̯͒a̷̡̓v̴̧̎e̶͛͜ ̵̺̕ņ̵̔o̷̧̐w̷̰̚.̶̡̾

Or in the case of YouTube, where there’s just no feedback, and you go back days later and that stupid bot comment is still there getting upvotes

With windows pro you can use Group Policy to disable them completely actually, though it’s obv not a good idea

Open Group Policy Object Editor. Navigate to Computer Configuration > Policies > Administrative Templates > Windows Components > Windows Update. Set Configure Automatic Updates to Disabled.