1. 11

    On one hand, I don’t particularly find the Linux code particularly pleasant to work on, so I probably wouldn’t be contributing in my spare time regardless.

    On the other hand, I think that this reduces the chance that I’ll send any patches in the future; I find these “welcoming” cultures make me feel less at ease, for whatever reason, which is a second strike against my involvement.

    For me, the code reviews I got from Theo were a highlight of sending in patches to OpenBSD.

    In the end, it doesn’t matter much – not everything needs to be for everybody, and the Linux community isn’t run for for me. This will bring some people in, push others out, and the world will go on.

    1. 7

      True. I’m also concerned that code quality (and therefore users) will suffer.

      1. 20

        Why? Do you truly believe that it is impossible to reject bad patches without telling someone that they should be “retroactively aborted”?

        1. -5

          Language as harsh as that is used daily in normal speech between developers. I’ve seen much worse slack channels in terms of use of language, and you wouldn’t believe the language I’ve seen used on IRC to describe bad code.

          I do indeed think that if you start censoring peoples’ language they’re going to change the way they contribute for the worse. If all you did was ban the absolute worst things like that, nobody would complain. But the reality is that’s not what will happen. Anything ‘offensive’ will be banned. Offensiveness is completely subjective.

          1. 17

            Language as harsh as that is used daily in normal speech between developers

            That’s a rash generalisation. At none of the places I’ve worked as a developer would that sort of language be acceptable.

            Offensiveness is completely subjective

            That’s also untrue. While there will be grey areas, there are some things that are objectively offensive if interpreted literally - and if they’re not meant literally, why not use another expression?

            1. 3

              I’m going to guess you’re an American, correct me if I’m wrong. EDIT: stand corrected

              The American cultural norm of ‘compliment sandwiches’ and being obsequiously polite is cancer to the ears of most people that aren’t Americans. I find it quite funny that Americans have this idea of Japanese as being very polite culturally, while Americans are insanely polite culturally compared to most other English-speaking countries.

              The typical British, Australian or Kiwi software developer swears like a trooper. It’s not uncommon, it’s not offensive. You wouldn’t do it in an email, but this is the key point: my emails are not Linus’s emails. The context is different. All his communication is by email, so naturally email carries a much lower average level of formality.

              That’s also untrue. While there will be grey areas, there are some things that are objectively offensive if interpreted literally - and if they’re not meant literally, why not use another expression?

              I don’t even know how to respond to this. Why would one only ever say things you mean literally? Speaking entirely literally is something I would expect of someone with extreme levels of Asperger’s syndrome, I believe it’s a common symptom.

              1. 9

                I’m going to guess you’re an American, correct me if I’m wrong

                The typical British, Australian or Kiwi software developer swears like a trooper

                You are wrong; I’m Australian, currently working in England, and I disagree. Regardless, swearing by itself is not something that I find offensive.

                Why would one only ever say things you mean literally?

                That’s not what I suggested. If you have a choice between a highly offensive figurative or metaphorical expression and some other expression - whether literal or also figurative - which is not highly offensive, why go for the former?

                1. 2

                  You are wrong; I’m Australian, currently working in England, and I disagree. Regardless, swearing by itself is not something that I find offensive.

                  I see

                  That’s not what I suggested.

                  I must have misinterpreted you. Sorry.

                  If you have a choice between a highly offensive figurative or metaphorical expression and some other expression - whether literal or also figurative - which is not highly offensive, why go for the former?

                  People say things that others find offensive, sometimes on purpose and sometimes not. Offensiveness is subjective. I genuinely don’t think I’ve ever been offended. Why go for one expression over another knowing that someone will get their knickers in a twist over it? Because you don’t care if someone finds it offensive? Because you enjoy it?

                  I have to admit that I actually quite enjoy knowing that someone got self-righteously offended over something I’ve said. It hasn’t happened too often, but when it does it’s just great.

                  EDIT: to be clear, there is ‘offensiveness’ that I don’t like. If someone is racist, I’m not offended, I just think that being racist is wrong and stupid and that they are wrong and stupid. I guess you could call this ‘offense’ but it’s really not the same thing.

                  1. 5

                    Why go for one expression over another knowing that someone will get their knickers in a twist over it? Because you don’t care if someone finds it offensive? Because you enjoy it?

                    I was not intending for you to provide an answer for the “why” - it was a rhetorical question. The point was that I do not think you should say something that may well offend someone, when there is a way to communicate without doing so.

                    Offensiveness is subjective. I genuinely don’t think I’ve ever been offended

                    I suspect this is why you’re having difficulty seeing the problem, and while I envy you never having experienced the feeling of being offended I can see that this could lead to lack of empathy for those who were.

                    Maybe you wouldn’t get offended by something, but that doesn’t mean it’s “not offensive” per se. I don’t agree that offensiveness is entirely subjective. Implying (or stating directly) that someone is stupid in communication to them, for example, is generally considered offensive. Statements can be intended to cause offense. There may be disagreement on specific cases, but I think in general that there would be good agreement in a survey of a random portion of the population that certain statements were offensive.

                    1. 1

                      I think the reality is that I would be closest to feeling hurt or offended by someone calling me stupid if I really had done something stupid. I’ve been called stupid when I haven’t been stupid many times, doesn’t bother me. I’ve been called stupid when I really have been stupid, and it does indeed make you feel bad.

                      I’ll acknowledge that the best way to deal with some bad code getting into the Linux kernel isn’t to make the person that wrote it feel bad.

                2.  

                  The typical British, Australian or Kiwi software developer swears like a trooper.

                  As a kiwi, I have not had this experience at all, quite the opposite. Everyone I work with is polite and respectful. This is just my experience, but I’m very surprised by your comment.

                  it’s not offensive

                  Sure, if it’s just swearing in general (though I’d still prefer to keep it to a minimum). The problem is when it becomes personal. Your argument is that people use ‘language just as harsh is used daily’, but there’s a line between bad language and abusive language. I don’t think the latter should be acceptable in a professional environment (at least one I’d want to work in). You can’t use one to justify the other.

                  1.  

                    The typical British, Australian or Kiwi software developer swears like a trooper. It’s not uncommon, it’s not offensive.

                    I work in software development in the UK and many of Linus’ comments would be seen as completely unprofessional in either emails or conversation - certainly far past the bar where HR would get involved. There’s a massive gap between swearing and direct personal insults.

            2. 19

              I am honestly at a loss to see who abiding to a bland CoC could lead to code quality suffering.

              Nothing in the CoC that I have read is in any way unremarkable. It’s simply normal professional behavior codified, with some additions to address the peculiarities of mostly online communications.

              1. 5

                It’s simply normal professional behavior codified.

                That ship has sailed, but I am not convinced Open Source should be held to the standards of “professional behavior”. For instance, should we stop accepting underage contributors? What about anonymous or pseudonymous contributions?

                Moreover what constitutes “professional behavior” differs wildly between countries and even companies within countries. For instance, “don’t ask don’t tell”-style policies are still the norm at some workplaces; do we want that in our communities? Or should we just accept that the average (non-Trump voter) U.S. sentiment should be the norm in Open Source?

                Regarding Linus, he does (did?) have a very strong way of reacting when people disregarded things that he considered important principles of the kernel such as “do not break userspace”. He isn’t shy to use strong language to criticize companies either :)

                Whether this has a positive or a negative effect is hard to say. It certainly antagonizes some people, and especially some potential new contributors, but at the scale of Linux should that still be the main concern of the project?

                In any case Linus knows he reacts too strongly too fast already. This is not the first time he says something like that. We should wait and judge the long-term effects in a few months or years.

                1. 11

                  Treating people professionally does not imply employment. A proprietor of a store treats a customer professionally by not insulting them, or refusing service. A teacher treats a student professionally by not verbally denigrating them, for example. A maintainer of an open source project treats bug reports professionally by attempting to reproduce them and applying a fix, even though the submitter of the issue may as well be anonymous.

                  It’s basically the 21st century formulation of the Categorical Imperative, as far as I am concerned.

              2. 13

                No one said you have to be an asshole when being firm about rejecting patches.

                1. -1

                  A lot of people will interpret anything firm as being an arsehole. If you don’t put smiley faces at the end of every sentence, some people will interpret it as you being an arsehole. If you don’t couch every negative thing you say between two positive things, people will react very aggressively.

                  1. 15

                    But saying someone should be “retroactively aborted” for some bad code?

                    1. 9

                      If you don’t put smiley faces at the end of every sentence, some people will interpret it as you being an arsehole. If you don’t couch every negative thing you say between two positive things, people will react very aggressively.

                      This sounds like a very broad generalization to me.

                  2. 21

                    I think there’s no causal link between “being nicer when responding to patches” and code quality going down. If anything I’d suspect the opposite; you get people who learn and improve rather than giving up after feeling insulted, and then continue to submit quality improvements.

                    1. 3

                      Linus Torvalds is nearly always nice when responding to patches. In 0.001% of emails he’s rude. Unfortunately he sends a lot of emails, and people cherry-pick the worst of the worst.

                      1. 19

                        His own apology and admission of a problem would indicate that the issue is significant. That “0.001%” is a made-up number, isn’t it? While I’m sure that only a small number of his emails are insulting, that small number still has - and has had - a detrimental effect on the mind-state of other developers. This is what’s come out of a discussion between Linus and a number of developers.

                        Don’t get me wrong, I like Linus generally (not that I know him personally) and I think he does a great job in general, but it’s clear that this personality problem has been a growing problem. A number of people - even quite prominent developers - have left the kernel development arena because of this kind of behaviour from Linus and others and/or issues around it.

                        I think this is a great step on Linus’ behalf, it must have been hard to make the admissions that he has and it’s a sign that things really could be better going forward.

                        1. 4

                          His own apology and admission of a problem would indicate that the issue is significant.

                          I disagree. I think the issue is massively overblown and that he’s been worn down by the endless bullshit about something that really isn’t an issue.

                          That “0.001%” is a made-up number, isn’t it?

                          If you’d like to go do sentiment analysis on every LKML email he’s sent, be my guest. I’d love to see the real numbers. But I chose the number to make a point: it’s a vanishingly small number of emails. It’s about half a dozen well known rude emails over two decades or more. They’re really not that bad taken in the context of the number of emails he sends and the context in which he sends them. He doesn’t say ‘this code is shit’ out loud to his coworker and then send a nice polite email. The LKML is the entire communication layer for all of Linux kernel development (plus the other lists of course). The context of those emails includes a lot more than what you’d normally include in emails in a normal development environment.

                          While I’m sure that only a small number of his emails are insulting, that small number still has - and has had - a detrimental effect on the mind-state of other developers. This is what’s come out of a discussion between Linus and a number of developers.

                          I mean frankly I think that if someone is going to be detrimentally affected by a few emails they are no great loss. I’ve seen a few people that say things like ‘I’d never contribute to Linux even if that were in my skill set, because they’re always rude to new people’ and then cite Linus’s emails as evidence of this. I’ve seen that sort of comment a lot. Dozens of times on /r/linux, dozens of times on /r/programming, many times on HN. It’s rubbish! The LKML isn’t obsequious: the email culture there is the traditional techy one of saying what you need to say straightforwardly rather than the traditional corporate one of layering everything in sugar to avoid sounding rude to people that expect every criticism to be wrapped in three layers of compliments.

                          The LKML is especially not rude to newcomers. Linus has been rude, in the past, sure, but only to people that are expected to know better. Long term, hardcore maintainers that have been around for years. Is it okay? No, but it’s not anything to get worked up about. It’s a really really minor issue.

                          There are way bigger issues in Linux kernel development, like the really scary amount of control and input some companies have in its development.

                          Don’t get me wrong, I like Linus generally (not that I know him personally) and I think he does a great job in general, but it’s clear that this personality problem has been a growing problem. A number of people - even quite prominent developers - have left the kernel development arena because of this kind of behaviour from Linus and others and/or issues around it.

                          They probably would have left anyway. People don’t change careers because someone said ‘retroactively aborted’ in an email once.

                  3. 7

                    funny, I almost avoided a potential security report to OpenBSD because I saw the contact is theo. I didn’t want to get flamed.

                  1. -1

                    Adopting Coraline Ada’s anti-meritocratic CoC is a disaster. Its intended as political tool for feminism, this is no secret. This will, at best, split the community.

                    1. 17

                      I contemplated not answering to this comment, because I am tired of this discussion a bit, yet I don’t want to leave it unchallenged. I think

                      • The Contributor Covenant is a very reasonable guideline. Not every sentence is as I would have phrased it, but if you wholeheartedly reject it, I kind of suspect you aren’t interested in a community I want to work in. There are some legal implications I think that would be worth discussing before introducing it, though, but overall I share its intent.
                      • Feminism is a positive movement in our societies, it has liberated women and it has benefited men as well.
                      • Politics is the process of making decisions that apply to members of a group, so yes, this CoC is politics, but not having a CoC is also politics, just less organized politics.
                      • Meritocracy is a fairy-tale political ideal that never realizes usually because “merit” cannot be defined.
                      1.  

                        The Contributor Covenant is a very reasonable guideline.

                        Questioning its contents is now off-limits. Rules must stay debatable. The “not aligned to this Code of Conduct” part is unnecessary for moderation, but necessary if its intended to be abused as power instrument.

                        I kind of suspect you aren’t interested in a community I want to work in

                        You don’t know how i work or where i work or what i do, but you still voice that (pre-)judgement? IMHO its really rude. If you are interested, i offer you to come around and have a talk.

                        Feminism is a positive movement in our societies, it has liberated women and it has benefited men as well.

                        Just from the ire it created, i don’t think the 3rd wave feminism, especially identity politics, are helpful to society. People are so fed up with it, they vote for people like Trump just to spite them. Maybe some time for reflection what went wrong?

                        Politics is the process of making decisions that apply to members of a group, so yes, this CoC is politics, but not having a CoC is also politics, just less organized politics

                        Ill quote http://paul-m-jones.com/archives/6214:

                        […], it is true that Ehmke thinks of open source as a political arena. As such, one must read the Contributor Covenant as a political document, with political means and political ends. Specifically, it is a tool for Social Justice.

                        Kernel-internal politics are fine, but Coraline Ada using it as arena is off-limits.

                        Meritocracy is a fairy-tale political ideal that never realizes usually because “merit” cannot be defined

                        Things don’t need to be defined to be valid (including personal identity).

                        In Software Development, competence is a scarce resource. If someone has the ability and knowledge to do something, they’ll also end up as decision maker in this area. This isn’t fairy-tale, this is how self-organization works, and this is how many OSS-Communities work. Its Ada who now whats that things happen differently. I highly doubt that her ideal will work at all.

                      2. 8

                        I want to disagree with this, because I don’t believe that “a political tool for feminism” is necessarily a bad thing, but perhaps that’s my politics showing. Do you have any specific objections to the CoC? What in particular is anti-meritocratic about it?

                        Edit: Link to the CoC itself, courtesy of rodolfo elsewhere on this page https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/stable/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/code-of-conduct.rst?id=8a104f8b5867c682d994ffa7a74093c54469c11f

                        1. 1

                          The content is only one of the issues. Alone the fact that its imposed top-down will make feel many people violated in their moral autonomy. The worst thing is, people who don’t exercise their moral autonomy don’t understand what kind of loss this is.

                          Maintainers who do not follow or enforce the Code of Conduct in good faith may face temporary or permanent repercussions as determined by other members of the project’s leadership.

                          Tell me, how is this different from authoritarian rule?

                          1. 14

                            Tell me, how is this different from authoritarian rule?

                            It sounds like… a rule. Some places have those, like “please put your clothes back on or we’ll ask you to leave the shop”, but it’s the content that makes them reasonable or otherwise.

                            My question is what specifically does this code of conduct prevent people from doing that you object to?

                            Examples of unacceptable behavior by participants include:

                            • The use of sexualized language or imagery and unwelcome sexual attention or advances
                            • Trolling, insulting/derogatory comments, and personal or political attacks
                            • Public or private harassment
                            • Publishing others’ private information, such as a physical or electronic address, without explicit permission
                            • Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting
                            1. 5

                              I’m not the person you’re replying to, but I believe this point can raise some contention. It’s argued it’s so weakly defined that it could be abused both ways.

                              Other conduct which could reasonably be considered inappropriate in a professional setting

                              1. 4

                                Yes, that’s a fair point - thanks. Personally, I believe there’s enough general consensus on what is considered appropriate in a professional setting that this isn’t immediate cause for concern, but it will come down to seeing when and how the CoC is enforced.

                                Most workplaces have similar language in their contracts and it certainly can raise contention depending on how it’s applied.

                                I realise you’re not liwakura, but just to bring it back around - I don’t think there’s anything in that to justify his original statement that it’s “a disaster”, or “a political tool for feminism”, however.

                            2. 14

                              I was once a visitor to South Africa during the apartheid government and stayed a couple of nights in a house up the hill from a police station. You could hear people screaming as they were tortured some nights. Being told that voluntarily participating in a group project requires you to be polite is really different from living under authoritarian rule.

                              1. 6

                                Tell me, how is this different from authoritarian rule?

                                You can’t just walk away from authoritarian rule.

                                No-one is being forced to contribute to Linux and follow the rules the community has.

                                1. 6

                                  Tell me, how is this different from authoritarian rule?

                                  You are free to contribute to the Linux kernel as long as you abide by the code of conduct. If you do no abide by it, you may be censured. You can either change your behavior, stop contributing, or fork the code and continue on your own.

                                  This last is what makes it different from authoritarian rule.

                                  1. 5

                                    imposed top-down

                                    What isn’t imposed top-down in open source projects?

                                    The license, the initial code, the name, the decisions on accepting patches, who gets commit access… The project owners can (and should) impose whatever they feel is necessary. What the hell is wrong with that? What makes you feel entitled to project maintainers not setting their rules?

                                    The only autonomy you have is to fork the project.

                              1. 6

                                Also, people were not aware of how to bury the telephone lines and hence, it was all over the place as the employees had no idea on how to bury the telephone lines.

                                This is very badly written prose.

                                Of course people knew how to run stuff underground. It just wasn’t possible to do so as demand for phone lines skyrocketed over a short time period.

                                1. 6

                                  These early lines were “blanktråd” (unsheathed, single wire). They had to have a significant air gap to prevent problems with induction and “overhearing”.

                                  The earliest buried cables (or, earliest I’ve worked on) were lead-sheated, with paper insulation around the signal wires, which were copper. Some are still in use today. The signal wires were layered, with each layer rotating/twisting in the opposite direction of the next one. Couldn’t do twisted pair easily due to the paper. Polyethylene solved that, though early polyethylene cables were still layered instead of TP. They were also “dry”, though not for long while buried.

                                  1. 1

                                    Thanks for this information!

                                    Knowing Sweden I bet there are multiple theses written about the installation of the first underground phone lines,from all manner of perspectives - legal, engineering, sociological etc.

                                  2. 2

                                    Could be English written by someone for whom English was not their first language.

                                    Maybe they had frozen ground issues. :-)

                                    1. 3

                                      Or a link aggregating site using machine translation.

                                      I’m from Stockholm, the ground is seldom frozen. The problem was likely more who had the authority to dig up the sidewalks and roads to install the cables.

                                  1. 2

                                    The one on Debian gives an odd mix of stuff. Here’s today:

                                    Sep 13 Walter Reed born, 1851

                                    Sep 13 58 °C (136.4 °F) measured at el Azizia, Libya, 1922

                                    Sep 13 British defeat the French at the Plains of Abraham, just outside the walls of Quebec City, 1759

                                    Sep 13 Building of Hadrian’s Wall begun, 122

                                    Sep 13 Chiang Kai-Shek becomes president of China, 1943

                                    Sep 13 Barry Day commemorates the death of Commodore John Barry, USA

                                    Sep 13 Bonne fête aux Aimé !

                                    Sep 13 Kornél

                                    Sep 13 День российской печати

                                    In addition to being a strange selection, some of the dates seem to be wrong. The Russian Wikipedia article on День российской печати (“Day of the Russian Press”) says it’s celebrated on January 13.

                                    edit: That last one appears to come out of /usr/share/calendar/ru_RU/calendar.common, which gives its date, correctly, as 13 янв. (13 Jan). So some date/locale conversion must be screwing up somewhere.

                                      1. 1

                                        My install (Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS) correctly identifies День Волха Змеевича (day of Volha Zmeevich) as 14 Sep. The Russian Press day is not included. It is included on Jan 13 though:

                                        $ calendar -t 0113 | grep 'День'
                                        Jan 13  День российской печати
                                        
                                        1. 2

                                          I checked on an Ubuntu install and got the same behavior as you. On my Debian install though (current ‘testing’ distribution), Russian Press Day seems to show up on the 13th day of every month, even though it’s correctly only on Jan 13 in the source file.

                                      1. 4

                                        There is a computer program called Vim, based on software created in the 1970s. It is famously difficult.

                                        I stopped there.

                                        1. 7

                                          People over estimate how hard it is to learn Vim. You need about 10 commands to get most of your work done. Everything else is extra. There could be a much better intro screen so newbies aren’t intimidated. I know there is an extensive tutorial, but there needs to be a baby-step ladder that bridges the gap between not knowing anything to that tutorial. Even a sidebar cheatsheet would be better than the almost-blank screen we see now.

                                          The harder part of getting into Vim is getting around how certain basic operations are much harder than in, say, Notepad. I’m thinking of yanking to the system clipboard, search and replace (the %s syntax is arcane), and searching for selected text. Tabs and windows are way easier to use on a GUI compared to on Vim, just because the switching commands are so annoying.

                                          1. 4

                                            Why? Those are both true statements that don’t mischaracterize vim and are useful to introduce it to a general audience.

                                            1. 3

                                              I don’t agree with the second statement.

                                              And I realized the article was intended for a general audience, so I stopped reading it.

                                              Maybe I shouldn’t have commented that I had, though.

                                              Edit clarified syntax.

                                              1. 2

                                                I think vim is only hard compared to tools that works exactly like all other tools we already know do, thus we have already learned it, and it seems easy.

                                                Coming from Notepad++, Gedit seems easy, coming from Visual Studio, jetbrains seems easy. Coming from nowhere similar to vim, it’s all new and different. It’s not harder than something else you have to learn from a clean slate though. It’s just that it’s not often we have to learn from a clean slate, so it seems relatively harder, compared to coming from sublime text to visual studio code.

                                                1. 1

                                                  Err, vi was created in the 1970s, Vim was written in the 1990’s.

                                              1. 15

                                                This is completely moronic and will have a massive negative impact. They are requiring websites to deploy technology that literally doesn’t exist. There is no such tool that can work out if content is copyrighted or not. Even humans struggle to tell the difference between fair use and not, how on earth will a computer be able to tell the difference between a copyrighted recording of a public domain song and a public domain recording of a public domain song? Audio wise the two are almost exactly the same thing.

                                                Of course those with power don’t care because systems exist that can detect all of their content and the system will only harm everyone else when there content is constantly removed by automated systems that can’t tell they did nothing wrong.

                                                1. 4

                                                  It sounds like this is referring to article 13, but article 13 has little in common with what was described above. Ignoring explicit exemptions made for small business and education (arguably including Wikipedia), it obliges information providers storing and providing access to the public to large amounts of copyright protected works to take appropriate and proportionate measures to ensure protection of works, such as implementing effective technologies. It also places the onus on rightsholders to supply the data necessary to power effective countermeasures.

                                                  In other words, the requirement is only on a particular class of (IMHO well-described) web sites to implement countermeasures, those measures must be deemed proportionate and effective, and the data that powers them must be supplied by the rightsholder.

                                                  The example given is of a countermeasure that falls short of the plain criteria - if an ineffective technology creates a needless burden on the operation of a large copyrighted content web site, it is easily argued to be neither appropriate nor proportionate.

                                                  1. 2

                                                    “Easily argued” where? When the regulators come to you and say you are in violation… where do you fight that? How do you fight that? What are the costs? Being right has very little to do with being easy, you can easily be right and bankrupted by regulation and legal fees.

                                                    1. 5

                                                      The same applies to every new regulation, article 13 is no exception, and like GDPR will slowly be tested out, article 13 will receive the same, and those cases will be paid by a wide variety of deep pockets interested in such things, as you’re no doubt already aware. By the time it filters down to the little guy most of the legal legwork will already have been done, and words like “large”, “proportionate” and “effective” will have well-defined meanings.

                                                      It only takes one case from e.g. a big content aggregator site to begin setting precedent.

                                                      Just to be clear this isn’t my department, and I didn’t spend any time reading article 11, but it’s tiring to see a pirate party representative’s blog post repeated everywhere with no counterpoints, especially when that post is demonstrably inaccurate according to the most basic reading of the regulation

                                                      1. 4

                                                        The same applies to every new regulation

                                                        Which is why regulations should not be broad nor generalized. “Large”, “Proportionate” and “Effective” are very much words that get to be defined at will by those given the power to interpret them. I don’t like regulations with those words anymore than an official “Be ‘nice’ and ‘kind’ to your neighbor, or face the penalties” – “Nice” and “Kind” of course to be defined later, by someone who is not you.

                                                        and those cases will be paid by a wide variety of deep pockets

                                                        I don’t see how you are so certain of this, GDPR absolutely hasn’t been paid for by the “deep pockets” alone. Its cost has hurt may of the “excluded small businesses” (under 250) because the follow on inclusion criteria was so broad as to bring many small businesses BACK into needing to deal with GDPR in a major cost-impacting, employee headcount cutting, and even transnational relocation way.

                                                        it’s tiring to see a pirate party representative’s blog post repeated everywhere with no counterpoints

                                                        Fair enough, and I understand the contrarian instinct. I get in trouble for it in my home all the time, I will almost reflexively argue the other side – not the best plan for domestic bliss.

                                                        1. 2

                                                          I will almost reflexively argue the other side – not the best plan for domestic bliss.

                                                          Same here. I don’t know why I do this.

                                                1. 2

                                                  pico < nano < micro

                                                  1. 5

                                                    mili < vim < kilo < mega < giga < emacs

                                                    1. 2

                                                      it’s just a static binary

                                                      Erm…

                                                      $ file micro-1.4.1/micro 
                                                      micro-1.4.1/micro: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, Go BuildID=5a83ed8300296d2d29c7c21b668bda0a1db5fa7ba, stripped
                                                      

                                                      (This seems to be a common misunderstanding these days.)

                                                      1. 3

                                                        I think a lot of people use “static binary” to mean “doesn’t link against anything other than libc” now. Not that that’s correct, but it’s certainly how the Go world tends to use it, which is unfortunate.

                                                      2. -1

                                                        Not sure I want an editor to be written in Go, to be honest.

                                                        1. 3

                                                          Why not? As with the parent comment you replied to I would very much like to know why you think so. The reasoning behind a claim is often more interesting than the claim itself.

                                                          1. 1

                                                            Some languages just come with a smell of lower quality. If something is written in a language like JavaScript, PHP or Go, I just immediately assume that the engineering standards are lower then some alternative written in e. g. Rust, F#, Haskell – or even C and C++.

                                                            I guess some languages are just more attractive to the “worse is better” crowd, and I have become wary of the resulting software.

                                                          2. 2

                                                            Lets be honest here, on a single user system 35kb of ram vs 1 meg of ram doesn’t change much… But given the choice one is better.

                                                            1. 1

                                                              Any specific reason why?

                                                          1. 2

                                                            Disappointed this is not a garbage-collected version of Figlet.

                                                            1. 13

                                                              I also sometimes fall into this trap. What has helped me is to distinguish between “I am writing a library” and “I am writing code specific to a single application”. The former invokes a mindset of reuse, generalized concepts, and generic code. The latter requires focus on the end goal and a willingness to accumulate application-specific code and data structures.

                                                              1. 5

                                                                I have found that this mindset / decision is crucial for all my projects in all languages. If I don’t know which it is, then my odds of stopping before I’ve produced something useful are basically 100%.

                                                                1. 2

                                                                  Taking part in the Advent of Code using Haskell helped to cure me of this. Just write the code: abstractions can come later…

                                                                  1. 1

                                                                    Have you done any Project Euler? At least in my experience you accumulate a bunch of utilities while coding that are reusable across challenges.

                                                                    AoC is great as it’s so focused and each day’s challenge can be decoupled from the other.

                                                                  2. 2

                                                                    Makes me think about that post a few weeks ago about “The Wrong Abstraction.”

                                                                  1. 11

                                                                    This is shameful:

                                                                    To Kaminska’s point, in April a once-shuttered coal power plant in Australia was announced to be reopened to provide electricity to a cryptocurrency miner. And just today, a senator from Montana warned that the closure of a coal power plant “could harm the booming bitcoin mining business in the state.”

                                                                    At a small scale, heavy residential electricity users in certain U.S. locations where marijuana remains illegal are sometimes checked out in case they are running a growing operation. I wonder if this idea of investigating grid usage by crypto miners could be applied at a large scale, or are they simply too big, coordinated, and powerful to be regulated through anything but national-scale action?

                                                                    1. 8

                                                                      Mining Bitcoin or other crypto is entirely legal. So it’s just a question of the miners signing a commercial power deal with whomever sells electricity. So there’s no need for miners to use subterfuge like illegal growers.

                                                                      1. 10

                                                                        If anything, people who are illegally growing marijuana might want to disguise their suspicious power useage by pretending to be mining cryptocurrencies!

                                                                        1. 5

                                                                          There could be zoning restrictions, though I would guess you’d build the mine in a commercial area anyway.

                                                                        2. 8

                                                                          This is shameful:

                                                                          What is the problem?

                                                                          We already expend huge amount of electricity on distributing cat videos and movies of men in cape flying around blowing stuff up. How is mining bitcoin any less ‘productive’ than beaming photons into people’s eyeballs?

                                                                          We already have huge established industry involving people betting on whether or not something will happen. Sports betting, futures market, roulette etc. If you want to save on some carbon emission, then turn off your computer and surrender your car to the nearest recycling plant. But you won’t because you think those things are ‘worthwhile’ because you like them.

                                                                          Maybe bitcoin will be useless technically, maybe it won’t. This is just a decentralised R&D program and a gambling pool rolled into one.

                                                                          The problem isn’t bitcoin. The problem is clean energy scarcity.

                                                                          1. 5

                                                                            “This is just a decentralised R&D program and a gambling pool rolled into one.”

                                                                            Best, concise description of it I’ve ever seen. ;)

                                                                          2. 2

                                                                            There’s a pretty good study on the electricity/carbon burden of marijuana manufacturing in California.

                                                                            https://sites.google.com/site/millsenergyassociates/topics/energy-efficiency/energy-up-in-smoke

                                                                            1. 2

                                                                              It seems to me that electricity is hilariously underpriced, if the best usage anyone can think of for it is a sad desperate attempt to circumvent Chinese capital controls.

                                                                              1. 7

                                                                                Or… bitcoin is hilariously overpriced if it’s worth the electricity to make it?

                                                                            1. 6

                                                                              This is a bit of a rant but I really don’t like software that invents its own query language

                                                                              So this post should have the rant tag

                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                Users can suggest tags.

                                                                              1. -2

                                                                                PZ Meyers discussed this yesterday.

                                                                                Summary: cuck whelks feast upon virile lobsters of the West.

                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                  I’m sure this will turn up in Jordan Peterson’s lectures shortly.

                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                  Current known companys hosting links to illegal content:

                                                                                  Fedora Project - sks keyserver
                                                                                  OpenSUSE - sks keyserver
                                                                                  MIT - sks keyserver
                                                                                  communityrack.org - sks keyserver

                                                                                  there are alot more i have not checked but these are the easy to spot one so far

                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                    What content is illegal in this case?

                                                                                    1. 1

                                                                                      the magnet links, if you look at the cases of kickass torrent and any other entity that hosted these links, they where taken down and pulled through the legal system with prejudice. If this continues they will not treat key servers any different, especially when they are seen to do nothing about it. There is no good outcome for this.

                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                        A magnet link is just a hash with tracker URLs appended. What torrent websites did was host the trackers themselves, which is probably a bit different.

                                                                                        That said, I’m pretty sure they would be treated the same way in the legal system. It might be hard to make a distinction between distributing a file hash and distributing a list of computers with the corresponding file.

                                                                                        1. 2

                                                                                          What judiciary – from any country – has ruled that hashes of a file are illegal? Under what jurisprudence is distributing a representation of copyrighted content or its address, but not the consumable content itself, illegal?

                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                            IANAL and I don’t know of a precedent, but the devil’s advocate would point out that sometimes it’s about the intent. If you have hashes of illegal content, there’s very little you can do with it legally.

                                                                                            Not quite conspiracy to commit murder, but are there any legal scholars here who can answer this question?

                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                              IANAL, but it’s quite obvious that otherwise legal objects can be deemed illegal depending on circumstances.

                                                                                              For example, in many countries alcohol is legal to possess and consume, but the production thereof and sales to minors is restricted. So selling or giving away alcohol to minors is a crime.

                                                                                              The problem here isn’t the hashes themselves - the (possible) problem is that the service providers (the one’s running the SKS servers) can be deemed responsible for their use in finding and downloading content deemed infringing.

                                                                                              edit clarification.

                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                      Put up a brief explanation for how to get an invitation via #lobsters. Brace yourselves. :)

                                                                                      1. 6

                                                                                        I agree we should bring over folks but lets not invite carte blanche. Invite people you would like to see and are willing to have civilized discussion about technology, don’t invite people you know nothing about. At the very least have a conversation with the person you’re hoping to invite to make sure they aren’t intending to come here to simply stir the pot.

                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                          Indeed.

                                                                                        2. 3

                                                                                          I just find the fact that your Lobsters handle is friendlysock and your HN one is angersock absolutely hilarious

                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                            I’ll leave it to @friendlysock to expand, but I believe they changed their nick here deliberately, but it seems to be hard-to-impossible to change a nick on HN (as per @pushcx comment elsewhere in this thread).

                                                                                        1. 3

                                                                                          to those who are considering buying a Tesla, please consider purchasing something that isn’t connected to the Internet for your safety and the safety of others.

                                                                                          Like what?

                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                            The mod correctly removed my commentary from the story because, per the guidelines (which I missed), it should be in a separate comment. So in reference to your question I’m copying the removed comment here for context:

                                                                                            Some highlights:

                                                                                            • Tesla cars run on sketchy software that’s connected to the Internet 24/7
                                                                                            • Tesla power charging stations will blacklist you if a complicated algorithm decides you need to be blacklisted
                                                                                            • Employees can “ssh into” all cars
                                                                                            • China wants new cars to report their locations to government databases

                                                                                            I share this as a public service announcement — to those who are considering buying a Tesla, please consider purchasing something that isn’t connected to the Internet for your safety and the safety of others. If you are working for an auto manufacturer, please consider how many lives you are putting at risk by connecting a 1+ ton speeding vehicle to a centralized server where hackers, or you own employees, can command and control them.

                                                                                            As far as what cars you can buy, there are many cars, new and old, that don’t have an Internet connection. Shop around. I personally plan to stick to used petrol based cars until auto manufacturers are able to design an electric car that I actually like.

                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                              Really? There are many new cars that don’t have internet connections? And software quality in most automobiles is appreciably better? Care to cite a source?

                                                                                              https://www.wired.com/brandlab/2016/02/how-connectivity-is-driving-the-future-of-the-car/

                                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                                Indeed. People in cars represent a lucrative, and increasingly “captive” market for advertising.

                                                                                                This, coupled with the obvious interest of insurance companies and local tax authorities to know exactly where cars are and how fast they’re going will drive increasing addition of connectivity to cars. Note I did not say “adoption”, as it will be increasingly difficult to opt out of such connectivity.

                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                  People in cars represent a lucrative, and increasingly “captive” market for advertising.

                                                                                                  It’s your choice to live in a Ferengi dystopia.

                                                                                                  1. 0

                                                                                                    Lacking off planet travel options, …

                                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                                      You can buy older cars that are in good shape. The one I drive has no tracking devices. It’s pretty good on gas. Maintenance has been a few hundred this year. (Shrugs)

                                                                                              2. 2

                                                                                                You gotta look carefully, though. Even low-end stuff might have tracking they dont advertise. At least they’re not remote-controlled, death machines.

                                                                                                The next frontier will be active, emination attacks on the computers trying to glitch them. Police in one area had something like that mounted on a helicopter. Low-cost, RF boards combined with high-output components will make those attacks cheaper. Might need TEMPEST sheilding for car computers even on older cars if expecting targetted attack.

                                                                                                Also, an older, common car will be cheap to fix due to being simpler (usually), part availability, commodity parts, and technician familiarity. There’s even junkyards out here like U-Pull-It that let you get parts out of wrecked or dead cars dirt cheap. Many parts are still fine even in a totalled vehicle.

                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                    Thanks. I can’t remember if it’s same company but same effect. The story also has this point supporting my recommendation of older vehicles in other comment:

                                                                                                    “But because the device works on electronic systems, he acknowledged that it would not work on all older vehicles. ‘Certainly if you took a 1960s Land Rover, there’s a good chance you’re not going to stop it,’”

                                                                                                    Might need really older vehicles for this one, though. Analog and mechanical systems to the rescue. :)

                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                      Let’s go back to those old slant-6s or straight 8s - 12mpg, spewing leaded gas fumes, heavy, none of that fancy electronic safety stuff like airbags, real distributors with points that could wear down, etc. Sadly, all engineering involves tradeoffs - if we are lucky

                                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                                        Most stuff your mentioning can be done without electronics or minimal use of them. They’re simple enough that they might also be able to use hardened electronics. There’s just nobody building cars that way due to no demand for RF-proof cars. We might see it happen in armored car side, though, if attackers start trapping important people in their cars.

                                                                                            1. 25

                                                                                              Can we not post scuttlebutt on twitter from a thread in the dedicated SomethingAwful technology shitposting forum?

                                                                                              1. 20

                                                                                                how many comments of yours do you think are policing what people post here? 10%, 20%? Before you respond with something along the lines of “eternal september” or “hacker news” just know I’ve lurked at HN for almost as long as its been around and I had a computer in the late 80s.

                                                                                                1. 30

                                                                                                  It is kind of a garbage source. friendlysock is doing people a favor by pointing that out, and I wish I’d read his comment before I read the thread.

                                                                                                  1. 6

                                                                                                    If you have any evidence that any of these claims are untrue (a rebuttal from Musk, Tesla, etc.), please share it with us.

                                                                                                    1. 7

                                                                                                      Legal systems generally (not the French) go with innocent until proven guilty for a reason. CEOs would not have a lot of time in the day if they had to personally prove every accusation made against them or their company.

                                                                                                      1. 6

                                                                                                        CEOs would not have a lot of time in the day…

                                                                                                        Funny, he seems to have time to respond to random twitter accounts all day.

                                                                                                        1. 0

                                                                                                          Obviously means regular boring old CEOs, not the visionary ones aimed at Mars…

                                                                                                        2. 1

                                                                                                          Taking your jab at French jurisprudence seriously, what do you mean by that? Is this some recent court case?

                                                                                                          Because France basically invented the modern Continental legal framework (well, Napoleon overhauled the ancient Roman system) which is used all over Europe (and beyond!) today.

                                                                                                          1. 0

                                                                                                            Sure, it is a well known fact that France is the European Guantanamo. 😏

                                                                                                          2. 3

                                                                                                            I don’t think Tesla as a corporate entity or Musk as a private individual / CEO will dignify this source with any sort of acknowledgement. That’s a PR no-no.

                                                                                                            However, if a personal actually trained in ferreting out the truth and presenting it in a verifiable manner (these people are usually employed as journalists) were to pull on this thread, who knows where it might lead?

                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                              The standards of evidence in most places, including science, are that you present evidence for your claims since (a) you should already have it and (b) it saves readers time. Bullshit spreads fast as both media and Facebook’s experiment show. Retractions and thorough investigations often don’t make it to same audience. So, strong evidence for source’s identity or claims should be there by default. It’s why you often see me citing people as I make controversial claims to give people something to check them with.

                                                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                                                There’s nothing surprising about the employee’s claims. It’s like asking for evidence that Google spies on users. They admit to it, and so does Tesla. So there’s your evidence, and I think it’s sad that you’re taking these trolls here seriously.

                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                  Thanks for the link. Key point:

                                                                                                                  “Every Tesla has GPS tracking that can be remotely accessed by the owner, as well as by Tesla itself. That means that people will always know where a Tesla is. This feature can be turned off, by entering the car and turning off the remote access feature. I am not sure why you would want to do this, but you can. Unfortunately, there are ways for a thief to turn off the remote access feature, and this will blind you to the specific information about the car. It will not stop Tesla from being able to track the car. They will retain that type of access no matter what, and have the authority to use it in the instances of vehicle theft.”

                                                                                                                  re taking trolls seriously. We’re calling you out about posting more unsubstantiated claims via Twitter. If your goal is getting info out, then you will always achieve it by including links like you gave me in the first place. Most people aren’t going to endlessly dig to verify stuff people say on Twitter. They shouldn’t since the BS ratio is through the roof. Also, that guy didn’t just make obvious claims like they could probably track/access the vehicle: he made many about their infrastructure and management that weren’t as obvious or verifiable. He also made them on a forum celebrated for trolling. So, yeah, links are even more helpful here.

                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                    But the point isn’t to even say that everything written here is true. The point is to share a very interesting data point that likely constitutes primary source material, and force a reaction from Tesla to stop their dangerous practices (or offer them a chance to set the record straight if any of this is untrue, which we’ve established is unlikely).

                                                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                                                      “Dangerous” compared to what? Force how?

                                                                                                                      Low-effort regurgitation of screencaps is not some big act of rebellion, it is just a way of lowering quality and adding noise.

                                                                                                                      But the point isn’t to even say that everything written here is true.

                                                                                                                      If we wanted to read fiction we could go enjoy the sister Lobster site devoted to that activity.

                                                                                                                      1. -1

                                                                                                                        …it is just a way of lowering quality and adding noise.

                                                                                                                        Being a troll is “a way of lowering quality and adding noise”.

                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                          Which is why several people are asking you to stop it.

                                                                                                                      2. 1

                                                                                                                        Is there any evidence your tweets or Lobsters submissions have changed security or ethical practices of a major company?

                                                                                                                        If not, then that’s either not what you’re doing here or you should be bringing that content to Tesla’s or investors’ attention via mediums they look at. It’s just noise on Lobsters.

                                                                                                            2. 10

                                                                                                              I agree with you in general, but this specific “article” is just garbage. (As far as I’m concerned, Twitter in general should be blacklisted from lobste.rs. Anything there is either content-free or so inconvenient to read as to be inaccessible.)

                                                                                                            3. 2

                                                                                                              I agree. I did at least learn from your link that Arnnon Geshuri, Vice President of HR at Tesla, was a senior one at Google that some reports said was involved in the price fixing and abusive retention of labor here. That’s a great hire if your an honest visionary taking care of employees who enable your world-changing vision. ;)

                                                                                                            1. 13

                                                                                                              Ah they tricked me with this one, it’s a Medium article hidden behind another domain.

                                                                                                              (Whenever I see “medium.com” next to lobsters articles I know not to click, since the result will be a weak thinkpiece by a frontend developer, wrapped in obtrusive markup.)

                                                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                                                i had literally the exact same response. “Ah, a medium article….about frontend dev……(tab closed)”.

                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                  Interesting ‘hot take’!

                                                                                                                  You judge people based on the ‘medium’ that they use.

                                                                                                                  1. 8

                                                                                                                    “The medium is the message” ;)

                                                                                                                    I have to admit though that seeing a medium link is generally a negative signal for me. Still click on many of them.

                                                                                                                    1. 7

                                                                                                                      I think Medium’s original USP was “only quality content”.

                                                                                                                      Predictably, that didn’t scale.

                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                        Many confuse Marshall McLuhan’s original meaning of that phrase. It didn’t really mean that the way a message was delivered was part of the message itself. It actually meant that the vast majority of messages were medium or average.

                                                                                                                        It would have been better said, “meh, the message is average.”

                                                                                                                        1. 5

                                                                                                                          This didn’t really make sense to me, so I looked it up, and I don’t think that’s right. The original meaning is exactly what we’ve come to understand it as:

                                                                                                                          The medium is the message because it is the medium that shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action. The content or uses of such media are as diverse as they are ineffectual in shaping the form of human association. Indeed, it is only too typical that the “content” of any medium blinds us to the character of the medium. (Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, 1964, p.9)

                                                                                                                          I wonder where you’ve heard your interpretation?

                                                                                                                          1. 5

                                                                                                                            This comment is obviously a troll. Fitting, given that McLuhan himself was a troll.

                                                                                                                            1. 4

                                                                                                                              Interesting interpretation. I am not sure how he originally came to that phrase, but his book certainly spent a lot of time and effort arguing for the now prevalent meaning.

                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                        I do not trust Software Freedom Conservancy (and with good reasons), but I agree with most of what is written here, except:

                                                                                                                        Copyright and other legal systems give authors the power to decide what license to choose […]
                                                                                                                        In my view, it’s a power which you don’t deserve — that allows you to restrict others.

                                                                                                                        As an author of free software myself, I think that I totally deserve the right to decide who and how can use my work.

                                                                                                                        1. 3

                                                                                                                          I read the article you linked to but didn’t really understand how that means SFC can’t be trusted. Because a project under their umbrella git rebased a repo?

                                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                                            No.

                                                                                                                            I cannot trust them anymore, because when the project joined Conservancy, I explicitly asked them how my copyright was going to change and Karen Sandler replied that it was not going to change.

                                                                                                                            One year later I discovered that my name was completely removed by the sources.

                                                                                                                            According to the GPLv2 this violation causes a definitive termination of the project’s rights to use or modify the software.

                                                                                                                            Now, I informed Sandler about that mess (before the rebase) and never listen her back after, despite several of my contributions got “accidentally squashed” during the rebase.

                                                                                                                            That’s why I cannot trust them anymore.

                                                                                                                            Because they are still supporting a project that purposedly violated the GPLv2 (causing its definitive termination) and despite the fact that I gave them the possibility to fix this, they didn’t… and tried to remove all evidences of this violation and of the license termination with a rebase… (that still squashed some of my commits).

                                                                                                                          2. 2

                                                                                                                            He’s objecting to restricting others in the way that proprietary software does, that’s the right he says you shouldn’t have. I think you edited out the part in your quote what bkuhn was talking about.

                                                                                                                            But more to your point, I also think that your right to to decide how others can use your work should be very limited. With software, an unlimited number of people can benefit from using your work in ways you may disagree with while you would be the only who would object. As a bargain with society, your authorial rights should be given smaller weight than the rights of your users.

                                                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                                                              As a bargain with society, your authorial rights should be given smaller weight than the rights of your users.

                                                                                                                              Is this a principle that you believe should be only applied to software?

                                                                                                                              Because if not, one could argue that a person’s special skills (say, as a doctor) are so valuable to society that that person should work for free to assure that the greatest number of people have access to their skill.

                                                                                                                              If the principle is restricted to expression, a photograph I take of a person could be freely used by a political party that I despise to further their cause through propaganda. I am only one person, and they are many. My pretty picture can help them more than it helps me. So according to the principle above (as I read it) they should have unrestricted access to my work.

                                                                                                                              I believe that the current regime of IP legislation is weighted too much towards copyright holders, but to argue that a creator should have no rights to decide how their work is used is going too far.

                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                Software is different than doctors because software can be reproduced indefinitely without inconveniencing the author. Photographs are more similar to software than doctors.

                                                                                                                                I also didn’t say an author should have no rights. I just said their rights should weigh less. For example, copyrights should expire after, say, 10 years, instead of lasting forever as they de facto do now.

                                                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                                                  Thanks for clarifying your position in this matter.

                                                                                                                                  I think we are broadly in agreement, especially with regards to the pernicious effects of “infinite copyright”.

                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                    It’s funny that I’m taking the parts of copyright here…

                                                                                                                                    Let’s put it this way: if I invented a clean energy source I would do my best to ensure it was not turned to a weapon.

                                                                                                                                    Same with software.

                                                                                                                                    It’s my work, thus my responsibility.

                                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                                              An update from the second of the linked articles:

                                                                                                                              Update August 23rd: The court has confirmed that the searches and seizures were illegal. (Allegedly, no documents or equipment was analysed/evaluated. We are trying to get that confirmed in writing.)

                                                                                                                              1. 4

                                                                                                                                A much better example, IMO, are these Markov generated Tumbler posts, trained with Puppet documentation and a collection of H.P. Lovecraft stories.

                                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                                  “The whippoorwills were piping wildly, and in a form capable of modifying the local system.”

                                                                                                                                  1. 5

                                                                                                                                    Poetic.

                                                                                                                                    And this one looks like one of those quotes that become historical, but almost no one that uses it knows what it means:

                                                                                                                                    “Any reasonable number of resources can be specified in a way I can never hope to depict.”

                                                                                                                                  2. 2

                                                                                                                                    I like King James Programming. Example: Exercise 3.63 addresses why we want a local variable rather than a simple map as in the days of Herod the king

                                                                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                                                                      hath it not been for the singular taste of old Unix, “new Unix” would not exist.

                                                                                                                                      Truth.