one instance I can remember immediately - lead SRE turns off an alert for some DLQ that has been finicky and experiencing periodic issues, often requiring intervention from the on-call team. he doesn’t tell the on call team he turned this off, suspecting that after a day or so something downstream will blow up. Then it does, he appears out of nowhere to save the day with the precise solution and looks like a genius for it.
At my place we would wonder why the alert was turned off which would most likely have been audit logged in some way. Perhaps they only play chaos monkey in systems where you can change things anonymously.
Have you never heard of a volunteer firefighter starting fires? It doesn't happen often, but it does happen. (And maybe with professional firefighters, I don't know.)
To my biased ears it sounds like these configuration-like files are a borderline DSL that maybe isn't being treated as such. I feel like that's a common issue - people assume because you call it a config file, it's not a language, and so it doesn't get treated as actual code that gets interpreted.
Taken as a whole, the title guidelines feel more focused on titles of articles, rather than whole website titles. I can understand the complaint, but in my opinion this title is fine. The title just feels a little... bare without the note.
Oh wow, I haven't heard of theis "plastic pollution treaty" it sounds super promising! I think one of the things that makes this issue so popular is just how obvious it is to see plastic trash all over the place. Climate change and carbon emissions can be a bit abstract, but plastic pollution is everywhere, and extremely visible.
I don't have super strong feelings on congestion pricing, but I'm a bit skeptical of anyone who says working class people are the major car users in NYC.
But all that aside, why aren't we talking about the insantiy that is free street parking. I have to pay $$$ for my small apartment, but your car gets to hang out all day for free? If you live and work in Manhattan, especially the congestion zone, you don't need a car for personal use.
I'm personally increasingly less interested in language-focused critiques when it comes to systemic issues. The article makes interesting points, but I think the effort it's trying to make is kind of on a euphemism treadmill. The article even says it - the issue is not with the terminology itself, but with the valuation of certain skillsets over certain other ones under our current economic system. It's also a bit pedantic - in this context it doesn't really make sense to use the dictionary to cite the "hierarchy" of what a word means. The word is being used in a specific context, and so it makes more sense to talk about it there.
I'd think I'd be more sympathetic if there were an alternative advocated for that wasn't just "don't refer to this concept". The concept itself isn't problematic - non "computery" people think about computers differently, and it is useful to discuss non-computer-expert users.
Even just thinking about other terminology - we use BIPOC for "non-white" because umbrella terms are useful. It's not that we shouldn't have a term, it's that maybe there's a better one.
It's a list of historically underrepresented characteristics, and membership in one group does not imply membership in all. "Tall, dark, and handsome" doesn't mean everyone tall is tan.
Probably should have just said POC in my parent comment to skip all this side discussion, but the repetition is the point. - it's used for emphasis.
From wikipedia:
"The term aims to emphasize the historic oppression of black and indigenous people, which is argued to be superlative and distinctive in U.S. history at the collective level."
> "Tall, dark, and handsome" doesn't mean everyone tall is tan.
Correct, but everyone who is tall, dark, and handsome is dark. The person you're replying to is asking: don't "black" and "indigenous" fall under "POC", since POC basically just means "not white"? Or at least black should fall under it.
I haven't read any Marucs Aurelius, so my impression might be off, but the way the AI speaks feels... I don't know, like a British person, or some American from an older time? It keeps saying "my dear" which feels very incorrect. I studied Latin in school, so maybe I'm more used to the translationese and odd grammar you see with that (like here - although this is also an older translation so you get some of that older english vibe https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2680/pg2680-images.html)
I'm guessing this was trained on a certain translation of his works, but I think part of the fun of speaking to a bot would be to replicate that sort of language barrier feeling.
(For context: that translation is a 1634 one by Méric Casaubon, with an introduction written in 1900 by W. H. D. Rouse. Seems Project Gutenberg is missing this authorship information, or lost a title page somewhere).
As a hobbyist game developer, I would love to see the field move away from being so windows focused. It's pretty annoying that every other kind of development I do works well enough across all platforms, but when I want to do game dev I pretty much have to boot into windows.
And as a game user, I would also just rather have games be cross platform, than use whatever OS specific optimizations happen now. But I've also never really cared too much about having high framerates, high resolution, millions of polygons, etc.
Riot Games recently announced that Vanguard, their kernel-level anticheat, is going to be required to play League of Legends soon. There was a considerable Linux community for League at r/leagueoflinux, and they are obviously upset. But regular users are also rightfully upset and stated their intent to give up league if this goes through.
Vanguard must be launched during boot, and has to remain running 24/7 in order to launch and play the games. Not to mention that Riot Games was bought by Tencent... TikTok mass surveillance spyware was bad enough. Fat chance I would ever let the CCP pwn my personal rig with 24/7 running kernel-level malware/spyware that can never be validated because it's obviously closed-source.
It isn't only Windows, we also have XBox (ok, a Windows flavour), PlayStation (a FreeBSD fork), Switch (a mikrokernel OS with POSIX like stuff), Android (a Linux where no one ports games to GNU/Linux from), iOS/macOS (NeXTSTEP derived OS).
Many of those, with UNIX like OSes, could easily port their games to GNU/Linux (specially the Android NDK ones), they don't because it isn't worth it, monetary speaking.
I'd argue the Windows API at this point is a stable platform that can be targeted to deliver for Linux gamers.
The Linux native ports keep breaking because of outdated dependencies, while Wine/Proton offers a stable experience that keeps getting better (most recently the Wayland support).
It seems to me that releasing native Linux games at this point cost more than it's worth.
