1. 54

    We need a postmortem on how a small group of wokes were able to force millions of hours of toil on the entire software industry. Think of all the repos and scripts that have to be updated… my god.

    The connection between master branches and slavery is suuuuuch a stretch: git has no concept of slave branches, but BitKeeper, the version control system git was based on did. In woke logic, being descended from something offensive makes you offensive, therefore git is offensive.

    As crazy as this is, there’s no way I’m going to fight this one. The mobs of self-righteous wokes that police the software industry are too strong, so I will update my repos and double-check my scripts like a good little worker bee.

    1. 45

      Here’s your postmortem: the “small group” of “wokes” appears to be the majority of our industry, just people trying to be kinder to one another. Personally I find the change heartening.

      1. 20

        I agree that this is true for a lot of things but I find this one a bit of a stretch. For example, I fully support avoiding the terms ‘blacklist’ and ‘whitelist’ because they provide a narrative that white == good, black == bad, which is not something I want to perpetuate in a society where ‘black’ and ‘white’ are adjectives applied to people independent of any personal choice on their part.

        The discussions I’ve seen around renaming the branch name have had white Americans leading the charge for this change and black people either saying nothing or that they don’t personally feel a negative connection with the word ‘master’ and they’d rather white folks spent more time addressing structural racism and less time addressing words with a tenuous connection to some awful bits of history. The word ‘master’ in the absence of ‘slave’ crops up in so many other contexts (in degree titles, master of martial arts, master chef, and so on) and, if anything, this narrative is pushing the idea that black people can’t (or shouldn’t) self-identify with the word ‘master’ in any context, which is pretty harmful.

        That said, on a personal level, I recently followed some advice in another article to put the current Git branch name in my command prompt and main gives me two extra characters of space before I wrap lines than master, so I do see a small concrete benefit to this.

        1. 15

          My own anecdata tells me that the number of black people who are uncomfortable with master/slave terminology in tech isn’t zero. I’m with you 100% on this not being the most important thing to tackle, but I fail to see why we shouldn’t do this as well as address the larger systemic problems.

          The default branch in git seems like such a silly thing for people to object to changing (to me, at least) as branch names have no special meaning. All these scripts that need changing have the same bug: they hard-coded a value which was never guaranteed to be static.

          This isn’t directed at you, but I read through threads like these and find myself wondering about the folks who argue strongly that this change, of all things, is simply too much to bear.

          1. 8

            The default branch in git seems like such a silly thing for people to object to changing (to me, at least) as branch names have no special meaning. All these scripts that need changing have the same bug: they hard-coded a value which was never guaranteed to be static.

            It was never guaranteed, no, but it was the de-facto default for the overwhelming majority; probably above 99%. I’m a big fan of “convention over configuration”, and that has now been kind of lost. I also have 70 git repos or some such I now need to rename (or stick to “master” which might be misconstrued as making some political point) and probably a script or three.

            At my last job we had even more repos, and a bunch of scripts floating left and right on people’s machines. Changing all of this for a group of ~100 devs and making sure everyone is up to date would be quite a task. Life is short; and there are real problems everyone agrees on. It just seems to me it would be much better if all that time and money was spent on more important issues.

            At any rate, I think why people object so strongly is a resentment over being told what to do. No one really likes that, and a lot of people have the feeling this change is being imposed upon them. Hell, I feel this change is being imposed on me, because I now need to spend time on something I don’t see the point of. It’s not a “passive change” like a project renaming some terminology which doesn’t affect much outside of some documentation or popup.

            Personally I think all of this is wasting a lot of political capital on something that’s … just nowhere near the top of the priority list, even if you agree it’s a problem in the first place. This seems to be a pattern I’ve seen over the last few years; this lack of focus, prioritisation, stubbornness, and tendency to divide people in camps is why I find American liberals so incredibly frustrating to deal with 🤷‍♂️

            1. 5

              At my last job we had even more repos, and a bunch of scripts floating left and right on people’s machines. Changing all of this for a group of ~100 devs and making sure everyone is up to date would be quite a task. Life is short; and there are real problems everyone agrees on. It just seems to me it would be much better if all that time and money was spent on more important issues.

              My expectation is that when/if this change lands we’ll all be even more bored with it. It’s just a change to the default, I don’t see why much at my work or in my personal projects would need to change. Either we’re using 3rd-party generic tooling which definitely has the ability to specify branches and better not have hardcoded assumptions by the time this actually happens, or it’s just some in-house tooling which only needs to work on our own repos.

              At any rate, I think why people object so strongly is a resentment over being told what to do. No one really likes that, and a lot of people have the feeling this change is being imposed upon them. Hell, I feel this change is being imposed on me, because I now need to spend time on something I don’t see the point of. It’s not a “passive change” like a project renaming some terminology which doesn’t affect much outside of some documentation or popup.

              I think you’re spot on when you say folks are mostly objecting to being told what to do. I think our perception of the people who (we believe) are telling us what to do is also at play here.

              Personally I think all of this is wasting a lot of political capital on something that’s … just nowhere near the top of the priority list, even if you agree it’s a problem in the first place. This seems to be a pattern I’ve seen over the last few years; this lack of focus, prioritisation, stubbornness, and tendency to divide people in camps is why I find American liberals so incredibly frustrating to deal with 🤷‍♂️

              I’m not sure I deal with American liberals much (I honestly don’t know the political leanings of the few American colleagues I have), so I defer to you here. My staggeringly obvious observation is that lately there’s a whole lot more dividing people into camps going on, by seemingly everyone.

              Thank you, sincerely, for taking the time to reply to me. What started as an off-the-cuff comment while I ate my sandwich has snowballed into quite the thread (by Lobsters standards anyway). I’ve spent more time thinking about this topic in the last 24h than I ever have before, that’s for sure :-) I think I’m done with this thread; my guess is most folks reading this, regardless of their thoughts on git’s default branch name, think it’s a garbage fire.

              1. 4

                I also have 70 git repos or some such I now need to rename (or stick to “master” which might be misconstrued as making some political point) and probably a script or three.

                This reads to me as emblematic of a certain paranoia in the id of this community that I really think we ought to call attention to (not you specifically, but this fear more broadly). This type of fear is a counter productive projection that we need to let go of because it prevents us from making real progress.

                I guarantee you that nobody is going to come across one of your git repos and call you out as a racist/colonizer/white supremacist/you name it. The vast majority of people calling for a better default branch name are reasonable and morally centered people who simply want to speak to their terminal without unnecessarily charged metaphors. They themselves almost certainly have git repos that will continue to use the branch master. People are not the personification of the “wokes” that the OP feels the need to fabricate.

                People all over this thread are afraid of the scary “woke mob” bogeyman, but if they were to get off of twitter and have an actual conversation with real antiracist people, they’d probably realize they’re normal people with strong moral values who spend energy on constructing a more just world. What’s funny to me about this whole “master” debate is that I think the folks making the most noise are the ones fighting against the change. Those pushing for it have bigger fish to fry.

                1. 7

                  In this particular case I don’t expect people to come in and start accusing me of anything, but they might see “master” and misconstrue that to mean something even though it doesn’t. Of course, if I do change it then other people might also misconstrue it to mean something. I kind of feel a bit stuck here; as this politicisation of a bloody branch name is forcing me to take a position where I don’t really feel comfterable with either side (you can’t really inject nuance in a branch name). Although I obviously feel significantly less comfterable with all the “SJW cultural marxists!!!” idiocy, that doesn’t automatically mean I feel comfterable with the other side.

                  I also don’t think that the “woke mob bogeyman” is quite as paranoid as you make it out to be; I’ve definitely seen quite a few incidents first-hand – and even been subjected to some – where people were beleaguered over a triviality, which sometimes resulted in some downright bullying. I know this isn’t the majority of people, but as the same time there definitely is a subgroup of what we might call “toxic SJWs”, for lack of a better term, which reflects really badly on the entire cause.

                  What’s funny to me about this whole “master” debate is that I think the folks making the most noise are the ones fighting against the change. Those pushing for it have bigger fish to fry.

                  I think that’s kind of a strange sentiment; do you expect people to just accept anything uncritically? And if there are bigger fish to fry, then why not fry them instead of wasting all this goodwill and political capital on this?

                  1. 3

                    I think that’s kind of a strange sentiment; do you expect people to just accept anything uncritically?

                    Of course not. Critical thinking is required to reflect on the value of language in this context. It’s precisely a lack of critical thinking that leads to knee-jerk reactions, projections, straw men, overemphasis of the technical implications and these wacky slippery slope arguments I am seeing up and down the thread.

                    And if there are bigger fish to fry, then why not fry them instead of wasting all this goodwill and political capital on this?

                    Because people who care about social progress are pretty good at walking and chewing gum at the same time. You can go to the local DSA meeting, take part in a protest, read books from the library, and also send emails about git. You yourself mentioned having 70 git repos. Is it hard to imagine that a large group of people are capable of multitasking?

                    1. 4

                      And if there are bigger fish to fry, then why not fry them instead of wasting all this goodwill and political capital on this?

                      Because people who care about social progress are pretty good at walking and chewing gum at the same time. You can go to the local DSA meeting, take part in a protest, read books from the library, and also send emails about git. You yourself mentioned having 70 git repos. Is it hard to imagine that a large group of people are capable of multitasking?

                      A day still has 24 hours, so there really is a hard limit on things, and more importantly, because you’re asking other people to change with you, you also need to factor in that not everyone is willing to spend the same amount of time on this kind of stuff. This is what I meant with “wasting all this goodwill and political capital”.

                      There are also plenty of far bigger issues that see hardly any attention, often because there is far too much focus on much less important matters. I’ll avoid naming examples so this doesn’t turn too political, but the whole “walking and chewing gum” multitask theory is a bit misguided IMHO. It annoys (even angers) me because all of this is standing in the way of actual progress.

                  2. -1

                    People all over this thread are afraid of the scary “woke mob” bogeyman, but if they were to get off of twitter and have an actual conversation with real antiracist people, they’d probably realize they’re normal people with strong moral values who spend energy on constructing a more just world.

                    Is it even possible to have a conversation with these Enlightened Ones, whose moral values are so much stronger than the rest of us?

                2. 4

                  You’re not black and represent exactly zero black people in tech.

                  1. 2

                    Very true.

              2. 7

                Or, perhaps, they are the majority of people who care. Most people don’t care too much about what to call the default branch. For the average person, this is probably a small bit of trivia. The people who care (in either direction) are probably the minority. Of course, the people are care are the people who choose.

                1. 4

                  I suspect you’re correct; I’m looking at discussions like this and mistakenly assuming most people are “in the room”, but of course it’s only the people who care either way who bother to chime in. Thanks for reminding me of that :-)

                2. 5

                  You you mean the majority of the leaders of large, influential entities in the industry.

                  1. 5

                    It’s kind of a difficult conversation to have; I think that all things considered, there are very few people who want to be unwelcome, much less (subtly) racist, but once you argue “this is a pointless change” it’s very easy to have the optics of that. This is made even worse by all the “zomg, another example of cultural marxist feminazi SJWs destroying civilisation!!!!111” idiots.

                    Most people that I know respond to this with “sigh 🙄”, but don’t really say much about it, and a very small amount of people I know are in favour of this. This is not a very scientific opinion poll of course, but as far as I can see it’s really quite a small minority.

                    As I argued last time, I’d personally rather not comment too much on this to give people who are actually affected by this a chance to speak without being drowned out, and in the 5 months since I placed that comment I still see mostly white people (including myself) discus issues that don’t affect them, which makes me kind of uncomfortable.

                    1. 2

                      How is the master branch unkind? Do you think everyone using git was being unkind until this change?

                      1. 2

                        It’s not, and I certainly don’t think everyone using git is being unkind either.

                        I think that changing the default branch name to not reference master/slave terminology (a common thing in IT which I know has made at least one of my friends uncomfortable) shows kindness and empathy. It is a tiny, minuscule such act, to be sure.

                        Not making this change is not an act of unkindness. Using the branch name “master” in your repos is not an act of unkindness. An unkind act would be renaming the default branch to a racial slur. That’s my view on it, at least: not being kind isn’t the same as being unkind.

                        I regret my pretty barbed initial reply to you, and I apologise. Reading it back, I made distinctly unkind assumptions :-)

                    2. 36

                      Worth to read: The Most Intolerant Wins: The Dictatorship of the Small Minority

                      It explains the logic behind it. The funniest part of this is that master as a word predates slavery in the US.

                      c. 1200, maistren, “to get the better of, prevail against; reduce to subjugation,” from master (n.) and also from Old French maistriier, Medieval Latin magistrare. Meaning “acquire complete knowledge of, overcome the difficulties of, learn so as to be able to apply or use” is from 1740s. Related: Mastered; mastering.

                      https://medium.com/incerto/the-most-intolerant-wins-the-dictatorship-of-the-small-minority-3f1f83ce4e15

                      UPDATE: tadzik’s was correcting me on the missing qualifier for which slavery i am talking about

                      1. 19

                        master as a word predates slavery

                        I’m pretty sure slavery existed long before the 1200s ;) Did you mean “american slavery”?

                        1. 12

                          Yes, sorry, I mean the slavery why the mob is upset now. Slavery outside of the context of USA is irrelevant to them because it does not fit their narrative. Thomas Sowell writes a lot about this.

                          1. 3

                            No worries, thanks for clarifying – and for the reading links :)

                        2. 6

                          This was an entertaining read, thanks. This should actually be the top comment, since it gives more insight on what’s going on than any ideological comment in this thread (on lobsters, but on other sites as well).

                        3. 45

                          Not only you can’t fight this one, but not actively participating in woke’s narration makes you their enemy. Even expressing dislike about this patch risks being taken as a person who is pro-slavery, which is an obvious BS. But indeed, you can’t fight with angry mob alone.

                          1. 13

                            You misunderstand the primary ‘woke’ argument.

                            The primary argument is that encountering the word ‘master’ reminds people of the enslavement of their ancestors, the related stories of suffering and the discrimination and oppression they are still being subjected to. It’s what is called a micro-aggression: something that isn’t a problem in small doses, but that adds up when experienced over and over again. Death by a thousand cuts.

                            What this change, and others like it, intend to accomplish is not unnecessarily subjecting people to such reminders.

                            1. 13

                              Guess we gotta remove it from the dictionary too, lest they chance upon it and feel hurt.

                              1. 5

                                That would be the logical conclusion from the argument, save for the word ‘unnecessarily’.

                                The question is when it is appropriate to not be accommodating to those that claim being hurt, because the cost of accommodating them is too high. And it bears mentioning that the cost effectively, indirectly, causes others to suffer.

                                It’s not all or nothing. You don’t have to reject the argument to reject the conclusion, as it hinges on costs and thus trade offs. There should be a few Schelling points here and I agree that it seems unreasonably difficult to defend some of those points.

                              2. 11

                                Well, my homeland has suffered a communist dictatorship and invasion for decades. Reading the cultural marxism here and there reminds me of the terrors my people, and specifically my family has suffered from communism in the last hundred years.

                                What could be changed, to unnecessarily subject me to these micro-agressions?

                                1. 12

                                  cultural marxism is a conspiracy theory invented by the american far right. Go complain to them.

                                  1. 7

                                    Actually it’s reinforced by former USSR KGB agents ;).

                                    1. 4

                                      totally a reputable and unbiased source on this topic

                                      1. 5

                                        Well, can’t deny that they actually had much experience with it (Stalin, Lenin), unlike USA

                                    2. 9

                                      sure, whatever different opinion appears it is fake news, conspiracy theory, or simply wrong, not worth consideration or discussion.

                                      1. 9

                                        When there is:

                                        • kids being threatened
                                        • jews in disguise
                                        • any flavor of progressive agenda threatening the lifestyle of conservative or reactionary white people
                                        • loose attacks on intellectuals

                                        Yep, it’s probably a conspirancy theory. QAnon is the same, just more loud and with sweatpants instead of cheap fedoras.

                                        1. 4

                                          nah, you’re just wrong. the origins of cultural marxism

                                      2. 2

                                        That one group was lucky enough to get their cause taken up by a larger group of activists doesn’t entitle any other group to get their cause taken up as well. But the arbitrariness doesn’t imply anything about the reality and worthiness of the cause (neither in the positive nor in the negative direction).

                                        You could start a movement to try and get your cause taken up by as many fellow activists as you can find to spread awareness so broadly that it leads to changes like the one we are discussing here. An outcome could be that promoting communism becomes something that is considered shameful.

                                        1. 1

                                          Frankly, comparing the suffering of the victims of Communism to having to make a minor change in a software workflow strikes me as wildly hyperbolic.

                                          1. 10
                                            1. If I was comparing the suffering of victims of communism to anything that would be the suffering of the victims of slavery in the USA in the context of my comment.
                                            2. What I was comparing is that the micro-agressions I am subjected to by some comments on the internet, are of the same category, as the micro-agressions one has to take when reads the master word while working with version control.

                                            If you think I should not be reminded of that, and the above is a hyperbole (not what you said), that is an opinion some share about the case about the push to remove the word master.

                                            1. 3

                                              Thanks for clarifying your position.

                                      3. 17

                                        I think you can make this point without using such charged language.

                                        I happen to agree with the change, but I don’t consider myself a “self-righteous woke”. I read your post and felt uneasy.

                                        1. 4

                                          The obvious solution is to fork git, keep master as the default name, and give it a nice new name, like… Consolidated Source Association, or similar…

                                          1. 3

                                            So in summary, you think that master in git is not offensive, and you think that people who do find it offensive are ridiculous. Curious, how many of your coworkers are black?

                                            1. 71

                                              Curious, how many of your coworkers are black?

                                              This feels a bit like “what do you even know about being offended”. I share /u/y0ssar1an’s viewpoint, so let me tell you how it looks from my perspective. I have zero black coworkers as I live in a country that barely has any black people in it at all (Poland). The word “master” doesn’t hold have any negative meaning to people around here. But there is another: “Collaborator”. Used very widely in VCS-related software, in our cultural context it immediately reminds people of the old meaning: “the one who collaborated with the nazis during WW2”.

                                              My ancestors fought in WW2. Am I now smearing their name because I have myself become a collaborator? Should I now feel uncomfortable because someone on the other end of the world came up with a word that makes me slightly uncomfortable? No, that’d be absolutely ridiculous. Every cultures has words that make some people uncomfortable, and trying to please everyone by making the subset of the language we use smaller and smaller is not just futile imo – it’s also pointless, and arguably a detriment to diversity by itself.

                                              The implication that slavery is somehow inherently connected to racism is by itself an ameri-centric idea. This whole master->main “diversity theater” feels like a symptom of a particular culture being unable to deal with their past (or largely their present, afaict) and thus resorting to empty gestures rather than trying to deal with real problems – last I checked, Github, the champion of the “master bad” movement was still working with ICE who’s basically building concentration camps for minorities. But I guess it doesn’t bother people as much since it’s not so well entrenched in american culture.

                                              1. 1

                                                The implication that slavery is somehow inherently connected to racism is by itself an ameri-centric idea.

                                                I could not imagine what exactly it is that make America, slavery, and racism so connected! Words have meaning which are inherently connected to history. Just because you want to pretend that they always mean what makes you feel best doesn’t mean everyone is going to harbor the same narrow viewpoint as you.

                                                1. 9

                                                  Outside of the USA slavery has been a think before, and at some unlucky places after the abolition in the USA. It did not generally have a racist motivation: debtors could sell themselves as slaves, prisoners of war were sold as slaves, and in many feudal states serfs had so few rights and possessions, that they were basically slaves.

                                                  It is ironic, but in Tibet actually the invading communist chineese have abolished slavery, where it had no racist character.

                                                  In the USA, and the Americas generally slavery did have a racist character, as the slaves sold by the Netherlander, English and Arabic slavers were mostly of African origin.

                                                  1. 5

                                                    Totally correct. Historians very regularly caution against comparing the brutality and sheer scale of the transatlantic slave trade to earlier forms of slavery. A great way to understand why is to go back to the fall of the Songhai Empire for it is through the unfolding of that empire and the colonial fire that engulfed its ruins that the taking and trading of slaves exploded violently and grew to dispossess, dislocate, and traumatize millions of families.

                                                2. 1

                                                  The use of the (American) English language can be seen as a form of cultural imperialism, but it also allows people like you (not native English speakers, but part of the global computing community) to reach markets previously unimaginable. I think putting up with the occasional linguistic disruption that emanates from the dominant market should be worth it.

                                                3. 33

                                                  I wonder how many of them have MSc degrees. You know, Main of Sciences degree.

                                                  1. 12

                                                    The two definitions of the word “master” for “owner” and “teacher” are a doublet, they come from different etymological paths that converged. Git derives its use from the former.

                                                    1. 7

                                                      And where they keep the main copy of their diplomas.

                                                1. 2

                                                  I recommend checking out Carpalx. It’s a program which allows you for a given sample input and set of variable weights to quantify the “difficulty” of typing for a certain layout. Interestingly enough these weights are powerful enough that you could even use them to help design one-handed layouts for those who can only type in one hand!

                                                  The software was designed with inspiration from Workman:

                                                  In recent conversation with Stephen O’Connor (Sep 2011), who has analyzed the Workman layout, I’ve been persuaded to seriously reconsider the parameters in my effort model. In particular, the model does not consider the possibility that the index, middle and ring fingers have different prefered motions, for a given travel distance. For example, most will agree that the ring finger prefers to extend for the W rather than curl to the equidistant X. On the other hand, the index finger has easier access to V than R.

                                                  And they’ve documented their measurements using a generalized model against several popular layouts, including workman, here

                                                  1. 1

                                                    most will agree that the ring finger prefers to extend for the W rather than curl to the equidistant X. On the other hand, the index finger has easier access to V than R

                                                    I find R and V quite similar, and if anything R is slightly easier to type.

                                                  1. 4

                                                    I never had much respect for alarmism. We’ve had it, in regard to climate, for decades, and I only too well remember Al Gore warning us in 2008 of an ice-free Arctic by 2013, just to give one of many examples. Greta Thunberg is the next up-and-coming generation of climate alarmists and given we do in fact have a global warming, the human factor is yet to be assessed (consider we are easing out of a small ice-age that just, out of chance, had its lowest point in the mid 1800’s when humans started measuring temperatures systematically).

                                                    However, I still wholeheartedly support renewable energy and resource savings, because we live on a finite planet with finite resources. We should do anything to save resources and energy, but not fall in panic over it or embrace ridiculous measures that are not sustainable in the long term. Maybe it’s needed to push the majority of people, but as a rational person I feel insulted by this.

                                                    Measuring everything in “CO2 emissions” is valid, but for a different reason, in my opinion, than to mitigate the effects on the atmosphere: The carbon we emit comes from fossil fuels, which are one finite resource I think should not be “wasted”. Given “CO2 emissions” directly correlate with carbon-based fuel-consumption, it may be a bit mislabeled, but generally valid.

                                                    In terms of web development: Stop bloating your websites with too much CSS, JavaScript and excessive markup and reduce the transferred weight, but don’t panic over it or say that a website is “killing the planet”. This is an industry-wide problem and needs to be solved at scale. When this doesn’t change, your website won’t make much of a difference compared to the few major players.

                                                    1. 16

                                                      the human factor is yet to be assessed

                                                      I thought that in 2020 it is a common knowledge that humans are without a doubt responsible for global climate crisis. And temperatures are measured also by other means than direct ones. That includes geological ones.

                                                      1. 3

                                                        Indeed only a fool would say that we humans, who affect the planet in so many profound ways, have no influence on the climate. The question is: How much? An everlasting ethos, in my opinion, is resource-saving, but it needs to be balanced so we don’t throw away what we’ve achieved as a species.

                                                        1. 11

                                                          What is missing in this analysis by Carbon Brief? Most of the current natural phenomena actually contribute to global cooldown and work in our favour. Humanity carbon footprint managed to beat even that.

                                                          1. 4

                                                            Climate is extremely complex, and one can’t really predict most things. I may bring out a strawman here, but how can we be so certain about centennial climate predictions (2°C-goal until 2100, for instance) when our sophisticated climate models can’t even accurately predict next week’s weather?

                                                            But as I said in my first comment, my biggest problem is the alarmism and I’m not even denying the human influence on world climate. So I’m actually on your side and demanding the same things, only with a different viewpoint.

                                                            1. 9

                                                              how can we be so certain about centennial climate predictions (2°C-goal until 2100, for instance) when our sophisticated climate models can’t even accurately predict next week’s weather?

                                                              Because weather and climate are not the same. We can’t model turbulent flow in fluid systems, but we can predict when they change from laminar to turbulent on a piece of paper. We can’t model how chemical reactions actually work at an atomic level, but whether or not they should take place is another simple calculation. We can’t model daily changes in the stock market, but long-term finance trends are at least vaguely approachable.

                                                              1. 16

                                                                I’m not even denying the human influence on world climate.

                                                                you said, “the human factor is yet to be assessed,” when it has been assessed again and again by many well-funded organizations. that’s denial, bucko

                                                                1. 1

                                                                  No, it’s not denial and science is not a religion. Assessment means studying an effect, and I still do not think that the foregone conclusion of 100% human influence is substantial. It’s less than that, but not 0%, which would make me a denier.

                                                                  1. 1

                                                                    Assessment means studying an effect

                                                                    so by “the human factor is yet to be assessed,” did you mean that the effect has not been studied? are you not denying that the human factor has been studied?

                                                                    typically the category of “denial” doesn’t mean you think a claim has a 0% chance of being correct; most people are not 100% certain of anything and the concept of denial is broader than that in common speech. organizations of scientists studying climate change are very confident that it is largely human caused; if your confidence in that claim is somewhere nominally above 0%, it would still mean you think it is most likely untrue, and you would be denying it.

                                                                    1. 1

                                                                      An effect can be heavily studied but still inconclusively. From what I’ve seen and read, the human factor is obviously there and not only marginally above 0%, most probably way beyond that, but I wouldn’t zero out other factors either. If that means denial to you, then we obviously have different definitions of the word.

                                                                      1. 1

                                                                        saying the human factor hasn’t been assessed casts doubt on it. now you are saying it is “obviously there” which is quite different.

                                                                  1. 5

                                                                    The only thing I can do, as an individual, is to adapt, prepare and overcome. In my initial comment, I already mentioned an example for wrong alarmist predictions, and they even date back to the 60’s! Moving the fence pole and saying the arctic ice will have disappeared in the next n years won’t help bring me on board. Al Gore back then cited “irrefutable” science and I remember being presented his movie in school, but his predictions all proved to be wrong.

                                                                    Still, we are on the same side, kel: Our footprints are unsustainably large, and I as an individual strive to reduce it whenever I can. The truth is, though, that even Germany, which only contributes 2% to global carbon emissions, doesn’t play much a role here, and the big players need systemic change.

                                                                    It’s funny, actually, given this pretty much rings with the individual argument of slimming down your website: When Google, Youtube, Medium, etc. don’t move along, it doesn’t make much of a difference.

                                                                    1. 11

                                                                      The only thing I can do, as an individual, is to adapt, prepare and overcome.

                                                                      It is both frustrating and liberating how little influence an individual has. However, in the moment you decided to post a number of comments on this site, you contribute to the public opinion forming process. I think that this gives you much more influence than immediately obvious. Discussions on sites like lobste.rs are read by many people, and every reader is potentially influenced by the opinions you or anyone else express here. And with great power comes great responsibility ;-) With that in mind, I am glad that other commenters challenged your initial comments about climate “alarmism” and prompted you to clarify them.

                                                                      1. 7

                                                                        germany is the most powerful state in the european pole of the tripolar world economic system. it has much to say about how other countries it is economically tied to are allowed and enabled to industrialize and maintain their standard of living. germans own plenty of carbon-emitting capital in countries that don’t have the same level of regulation, and they need to be made accountable for the effect they have on the world.

                                                                2. 3

                                                                  so we don’t throw away what we’ve achieved as a species

                                                                  Do you truly think silly performative ecological politics are going to “throw away” your first world niceties or are you talking about how ecological collapse will likely trigger progressively even more massive failures in supply chains as we inevitably blow through 1.5C

                                                                  1. 3

                                                                    There’s more to the world than economics, e.g. achievements in human rights and freedoms. But I don’t want to go too off-topic here (we are on Lobste.rs, after all).

                                                                    1. 5

                                                                      achievements in human rights and freedoms

                                                                      None of this will matter when people living in most affected areas – that are suffering from climate crisis already (thanks to droughts, lands becoming effectively uninhabitable etc.), not to mention what will happen in the following years – will come to our first world demanding a place to live. And we will point our guns at them. As one of the commenters said: “Desperate people will do desperate things”. And all of this will happen over years, decades. Painstakingly.

                                                                      Unfortunately some people will write it off as plain alarmism while dismissing well proven scientific position. And the position is: I want to have good news but it looks really fucking bad. I’d love to ignore all those facts just to live a happier life but I find it hard. It saddens me deeply that behind that facade of freethinking, you pretty much made up your mind for good. I do not mean to insult you. It’s just the way you speak in all your comments that makes me think that way. I hope I am wrong. Eh, shame.

                                                                      One could consider famous Newsroom piece about climate change as an alarmism but unfortunately it seems to be very on point.

                                                              2. 9

                                                                The planet will be fine. It’s the people who are fucked.

                                                                George Carlin

                                                                I almost want to agree with you, except that underestimating the impact of climate change has already cost society massively and climbing.

                                                                Firstly, if you believe that our current rate of temperature change is historically typical, there’s an xkcd comic for you.

                                                                I will go as far as to say that to consider climate change an existential threat are perhaps looking at it the wrong way. But I’m not about to start undermining their cause in this way because people tend toward apathy toward long-term threats and the cost of underestimating climate change is far greater than the risk of overestimating it. Climate change has already begun to have direct costs, both monetary and humanitarian.

                                                                As an example of monetary cost, in Gore’s documentary he presents a demonstration of rising sea levels around Manhattan Island and makes a point that the September 11 memorial site will be below sea level.

                                                                This might be true, but below sea level does not mean underwater. The flooding projection makes the assumption that humans are either going to do nothing about it and drown or are going to pack up New York and leave. I think neither scenario is likely.

                                                                What will happen is that the rising sea level will be mitigated. The city will build huge-scale water-control mechanisms (such as levees). The cost of living on the island will rise sharply. Once in a while, this system will fail, temporarily flooding the homes of millions of people. They will bail it out and go on living.

                                                                Not so bad, right? The catch is that the projected cost of this, in purely financial terms, is predicted to vastly outweigh the cost of reducing pollution now. And we don’t need to hit discrete targets to see a benefit – every gram of CO2 that we don’t emit today will reduce the amount of water in a nearly-certain future flooding event.

                                                                This is beside the humanitarian cost.

                                                                Climate change does not come without opportunities. Likely, the farming season in Canada and Russia will lengthen, leading to more food produced in those countries. Cool, but meanwhile in other places, the drought season will lengthen. People won’t be magically transported from one place to another; there are logistical, political, and sociological obstacles. People stuck in those regions will become increasingly desperate, and desperate people do desperate people things. With today’s weapons technology, that’s the kind of situation that really could lead to humanity’s extinction.

                                                                So please be careful with the point-of-view that you present. You might not be wrong, but contributing to a culture that underestimates the oncoming danger is exactly what got us here in the first place.

                                                                1. 5

                                                                  I’m not denying the danger or playing it down, and we can see current effects of global warming. We humans must adapt to it, or else we will perish. It would not be far-fetched to assume that this global warming might even lead to more famines that can kill millions of people.

                                                                  The problem I see is the focus on CO2, but resource usage has many forms. Many people find pleasure in buying EVs, while charging them with coal power and not really reducing their footprint a lot (new smartphone every year, lots of technological turnover, lots of flights, etc.). I’m sure half of the people accusing me of “playing it down” have a much larger “CO2 footprint” (I’d rather call it resource footprint) than I do.

                                                                2. 9

                                                                  The climate has not changed like this before in human timescales. https://xkcd.com/1732/

                                                                  Today, denying human-induced climate change requires more than disagreeing with the scientific consensus on future predictions, it requires denying current events. The climate crisis is already here, and it already has a death toll.

                                                                  The good news is that you don’t need to update your understanding and stop swallowing narratives produced by fossil fuel corporations, although we could certainly use all the help we can get. You just need to get out of the way of people like Greta who are taking meaningful action to avert the climate crisis on a systemic level. If you live in the US, Sunrise Movement are extremely effective young organizers who deserve your respect. If all you have to offer is sniping from the sidelines, maybe you should rethink your contributions. Have you actually done anything to make the world a better place, or do you just complain about people who do the work?

                                                                  1. 5

                                                                    Given the many factors influencing climate itself and the models built to predict it, studies greatly diverge from each other. Big fossil fuel corporations cite the least-alarmist ones, and environmental extremists cite the most-alarmist ones. As always, the truth lies in the middle.

                                                                    It’s a great shame that people die from this, given it’s a negative effect of the fact that the entire industrial age (including urbanization and expansion) was built on the assumptions of a small ice age that we had until the 1850’s and 1900’s. The increasingly warm global temperature has its toll.

                                                                    My favourite example is the nordic spruce, which is the main tree for corporate wood production in Germany. It originally comes from the mountains, but was increasingly used during the industrialization and planted in normal plane land, which worked because the weather was still relatively cool. The few degrees of warming leads to a massive weakness of the trees, and our German forests, which are substantially made up of spruce monocultures, are infected with numerous diseases and pests because of this.

                                                                    Over the years I’ve read so many alarmist reports by big scientific players which proved to be completely false, which is okay. Scientists can err, especially with something as multivariate as climate. My view is that we should not only look at “CO2 emissions” as a mantra, but adapt to the changing climate (diversify forests, etc.) instead of turning this into yet another speculator’s paradise with CO2-certificates which help nothing but shift wealth.

                                                                    The real damning truth is the following: I live in Germany, and if one flipped a switch that would wipe Germany and all its inhabitants from the face of the earth, the global CO2 emissions would only drop by 2%. As always, it’s the big players (USA, China, etc.) that need to change systemically.

                                                                    Have you actually done anything to make the world a better place, or do you just complain about people who do the work?

                                                                    Not to sound too harsh, but I basically don’t matter, just like the individual Chinese or US person matters. Electronic vehicles won’t make a difference, because CO2 emissions are just offset to developing countries where the battery-components are mined and processed. Charging an EV in Germany means coal power, no matter how much you buy “eco” electricity, as it’s just a big shuffling on the energy market.

                                                                    I do my part not buying a phone or computer every year, driving a used car (Diesel), which is still more environmentally friendly than buying a new car which needs to be produced in the first place, buying regional, etc. These things, as an individual, make much more of a difference than buying a Tesla and continuing living the large lifestyle most people have gotten used to.

                                                                    1. 11

                                                                      As always, the truth lies in the middle.

                                                                      I want to call out this both-sides-ism. Basic shifting of the Overton Window can cause you to believe insane things if you assume that the truth always lies in the middle. Reasonable positions can seem extreme if you live in a society that, for example, has been shaped by fossil fuel billionaires for decades.

                                                                      It’s also wrong to ignore worst-case scenarios.

                                                                      There has been a great deal of discussion around the IPCC reports, which are very conservative (by which I mean cautious about only making predictions and proposals for which they have a great deal of evidence). Unlikely but catastrophic possibilities, such as the terrifying world without clouds scenario, also deserve attention. Beyond that are the “unknown unknowns”, the disaster scenarios that our scientists are not clever enough (or do not have the data) to anticipate.

                                                                      Global nuclear war or dinosaur killer asteroid impacts may seem unlikely today, but if we do not prepare for and take steps to avoid such cataclysms, someday we will get a very bad dice roll and reap the consequences.

                                                                      In other words, the obvious predictable results of global heating on our current trajectory are bad enough, and I do not consider discussing them to be alarmism, but edge cases that might be reasonably seen as alarmism I feel are underappreciated, rather than overpublicized as you seem to believe.

                                                                      In other words, the truth, rather than lying in the middle, might be significantly worse than any messaging from the mainstream climate movement suggests.

                                                                      1. 6

                                                                        I’ll just say that personal consumption habits are not what I’m talking about, although I can see why you would bring them up, given the article we are commenting on is about changing personal website design.

                                                                        Sustainability, and justice for those who suffer most in the climate crisis, will require changing how our society functions. It will require accounting for the true costs of our actions, and I’m not convinced that capitalism as we know it will ever hold corporations accountable for their negative externalities. It will require political change, on a local, national and global level. It will require grassroots direct action from the people. You as an individual can do little, but collectively I assure you we can change the world, for the better instead of for the worse.

                                                                        1. 6

                                                                          The role of the collective against the individual is of course a truism. The real costs of a product are often hard to reflect on. One good example is sustainably produced meat, which costs 6 times more than “normal” meat you can buy at the supermarket. Reducing meat consumption to once a week (instead of almost every day, which is insane) would greatly reduce the footprint of an individual, but I don’t hear greenpeace talking about reducing meat intake, even though it makes up 28% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

                                                                          Instead, we are told to “change society” and accept new legislation that fundamentally change not only our economies, which deserve some reform in many places, but also individual freedoms for questionable benefit other than certain profiteers in certain sectors.

                                                                          So I hope I didn’t come across as someone denying the effects of climate change. Instead, I don’t like the alarmism, which has been often debunked in the last decades, only to sell extreme political measures. A much more effective approach would be, I think, to urge people to reduce their resource footprint and allow them to make the right choices.

                                                                          To give an example, maybe the EU could stop funding mass-meat-production if they really cared about this topic at all. Because this stuff really undermines the credibility of the entire climate “movement”.

                                                                    2. 2

                                                                      (consider we are easing out of a small ice-age that just, out of chance, had its lowest point in the mid 1800’s when humans started measuring temperatures systematically).

                                                                      Have any sources so I can read more about this? First I’ve heard of this.

                                                                      1. 4

                                                                        Sure! There is a great paper called “Using Patterns of Recurring Climate Cycles to Predict Future Climate Changes” by Easterbrook et. al. (published in Evidence-Based Climate Science (Second Edition), 2016) which is sadly paywalled and I can’t fully share here, but there’s a great figure in it that shows temperature-readings from tree-rings in China.

                                                                        Between 800 and 1200, we had the global medieval warm period, which allowed people for instance to grow wine in England and is the reason why Greenland is called “green” land (because it wasn’t covered in ice when the vikings discovered around 900-1000). The temperatures were normal between 1200 and 1600, but were then followed by a “Little Ice Age” between 1600 and 1900. In general, one can indeed see that global temperatures are rising above the average over the last 2000 years, but it’s nothing unusual.

                                                                        To give one more example: Glaciers receding in Norway, due to the currently observable global warming, reveal tree logs and trading paths roughly from the Roman ages used between 300 and 1500. If you look at the aforementioned figure, this pretty much coincides with the extremely warm period beginning around 300. Even though it went below around 700, it never really go into a cold area which would’ve let the glacier “recover”, explaining that it has been used until 1500 when the next cold period (the Little Ice Age) started.

                                                                        I hope this was helpful to you!

                                                                        1. 6

                                                                          It sounds like you’re arguing that the current global temperature rise is not due to humans, or is just a natural temperature cycle coming to an end, which is extremely wrong. The slight cooling period you’re talking about did happen, but as of now both the speed and projected magnitude of the current temperature changes are unprecedented in human history.

                                                                          We can argue all day about specifically how bad things are going to get given the temperature rise, and how much someone’s stupid little personal website is going to contribute to it, but the fact that the temperature rise is man-made and is changing faster than any global temperature change ever in human history is supported by enough broad scientific consensus to be pretty much indisputable.

                                                                          1. 4

                                                                            This is a placeholder reply so I don’t forget (immediately quite busy), but there is no evidence the pre-industrial era “little ice age” was a global phenomenon.

                                                                            1. 4

                                                                              That could very well be! What I cited were results from Europe and Asia, and I would not be surprised if it turned out differently in other places of the world.

                                                                      1. -3

                                                                        the biggest thing since bitcoin

                                                                        Meaning, “fails at its primary (only) purpose and only useful for running Ponzi schemes, while accelerating climate change?”

                                                                        I haven’t read the article; the headline turned me off already.

                                                                        1. 4

                                                                          You might want to actually give it a shot. Take it from someone who hates these headlines too.

                                                                          1. 0

                                                                            I’ve read some (what I think will be) more nuanced posts on GPT-3. I guess it’s interesting, but I’m not really invested enough to have formed an opinion on this one (yet).

                                                                            1. 8

                                                                              No seriously, read the article.

                                                                              1. 11

                                                                                This article is a great litmus test for people who ignore or flag things based on the headline.

                                                                          2. 3

                                                                            How does Bitcoin fail at being a peer-to-peer electronic cash system?

                                                                            1. 1

                                                                              It’s too slow to replace cash. People do the bulk of the transactions off-chain, which kinda defeats the purpose.

                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                Your main criticism is “it’s too slow”? All digital money is slow. It only looks fast because banks take on the risk of digital money transfers and give you the benefit of the doubt. For “digital cash”, I’d say 10 minutes is pretty good.

                                                                                1. 4

                                                                                  banks take on the risk of digital money transfers and give you the benefit of the doubt

                                                                                  That’s kind of a killer feature, though.

                                                                                  1. 3

                                                                                    If you desperately need that kind of thing, yes. Bitcoin provides benefits traditional money and banking doesn’t, hence it’s existence. There is nothing preventing banking solutions on top of Bitcoin.

                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                      The primary benefits of Bitcoon are lack of regulation and high volatility due to same, and a secondary benefit of being distributed with no bias towards societal economic utility for the people getting lucky while mining.

                                                                                  2. 1

                                                                                    You just got done comparing it to cash, not debit or credit card transactions. Cash is instantaneous. Credit cards have fraud detection, which Bitcoin lacks.

                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                      How is cash instantaneous acorss the ocean?

                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                        I’m not sure why I need to say this but transporting money is not the same as exchanging it

                                                                                    2. 1

                                                                                      Most bank transfers days 2 days anyway

                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                After reaching out to pushcx when the feature was first implemented to make sure I wasn’t in the wrong I just added the element to ublock and forgot about it

                                                                                1. 24

                                                                                  This is an advertisement for a Kickstarter and does not contain the type of technical content worthy of a Lobsters post.

                                                                                  1. 7

                                                                                    It links to these technical places:

                                                                                    1. 11

                                                                                      Those would’ve been better submissions!

                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                        These are what I wanted to see, and I’d have been tempted to hide/flag if the content given had lacked any links to further technical detail.

                                                                                        But since that wasn’t the case, I think there’s value in highlighting the Kickstarter so people can support the project if they’re interested?

                                                                                        I’m often tempted to write comments like this on “does x belong here?” threads then abandon them to avoid spamming up the discussion further. So, an actual suggestion:

                                                                                        Perhaps in cases like this where there’s a good reason to link to the PR material, we could encourage people to also add a comment or blurb calling out any relevant links or technical information?

                                                                                      2. 7

                                                                                        Agreed! I think this is squarely on-topic. It’s an interesting product that inspired me to read about https://pwnagotchi.ai/ and other associated devices. I learned a lot from reading the reading this page and searching the web for the topics mentioned. The USB stack fuzzing idea is interesting. I think I might try exactly that on a piece of embedded equipment I have lying around.

                                                                                      3. 5

                                                                                        It might be. Or it might just be performance art, as the kickstarter in question does not even exist.

                                                                                        If it ships, I’d sure like to see a link to the promised firmware and hardware source. It’ll be an interesting gadget if it ever becomes real.

                                                                                        1. 5

                                                                                          The heart of it seems to be this very impressive beast https://www.ti.com/lit/gpn/cc1101

                                                                                          Probably a real swine to write drivers for, but as usual, ti supplies a bunch of libraries you could use.

                                                                                          Moore’s Law has ceased to be “Doubling of CPU speed every 18 months”. Actually, it never was.

                                                                                          Actually as stated by Moore, it was “Doubling the number of transistors every 12”. That has reach the peak of how much plain CPU speed that can be delivered.

                                                                                          What is still happening, is more and more powerful and weirder and more exotic chips like this.

                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                            Can you explain what makes this a weird, exotic, impressive beast? Almost all of my deep knowledge relates to server hardware, I haven’t worked with microcontroller-scale things for about a decade.

                                                                                            1. 9

                                                                                              Read the data sheet I linked to for the full details, but basically…

                                                                                              It’s a radio receiver transmitter (transceiver) that frequency hops over 300-348 MHz, 387-464 MHz and 779-928 MHz bands and converts from an RF baseband signal to a stream of samples (i/q’s) and then encode/decode data from that via a bunch of different modem algorithms, plus a bunch of nifty stuff require to make it practical (sync detect, address and crc check, …) in a tiny (2.4mmx2.4mm) package.

                                                                                              In The Bad Old Days that used to require a lot of fancy rf circuitry, maybe an fpga, certainly a dsp, and a hell of a lot of very fancy maths and very smart code.

                                                                                              (Source. I do this stuff for a living)

                                                                                              1. 1

                                                                                                Ahh interesting. Yes, this is why I needed an explanation because I don’t do this stuff for a living. But certainly want to learn more. I can’t do much with a data sheet just yet

                                                                                                edit: And thank you!

                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                  I’m on the software side of the picture so there is always more for me to learn on the RF/hardware side, but I at least know where the various tasks are done on the device I work on.

                                                                                                  There are a lot of these super smart super tiny chips coming on the market… the down side smart equals complex to drive, and chip tends to mean you get what you get, if the chip doesn’t do what you want…. get another chip (means PCB redesign) and have a massive task of rewriting your drivers.

                                                                                                  If you ever pull the bluetooth standard and print it out, (you will need to buy a new bookcase), you get an idea of the scale of “tiny,cheap,super smart aka insanely complex” I’m talking about.

                                                                                                  That said, a lot of things that were very expensive, are becoming available at commodity prices. In some ways dumber, someways less customised, but with 90% of what you want.

                                                                                                  And that will probably improve in time.

                                                                                              2. 1

                                                                                                yes i’d love to know as well!

                                                                                              3. 1

                                                                                                i guess if it is paired with another ti µc it should be quite easy. i have still an ez430 chronos lying around, which wasn’t too hard to write code for, given the examples etc.

                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                  It would be nice if they marked PDF links more visibly.

                                                                                              4. -1

                                                                                                I don’t think so and so you are wrong because what determines posts to be worthy of lobste.rs is the users, and I am a user of lobste.rs :)

                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                  I don’t think a flat “you are wrong” is correct when the post has already been spam-flagged over ten times.

                                                                                                  1. 0

                                                                                                    It’s just a joke about “x on lobste.rs should only ever be y” purity posts. You know what they say about death, taxes, and arguments about what lobsters “is”…

                                                                                              1. 9

                                                                                                I wish for this submission to have more about it in the title.

                                                                                                1. 5

                                                                                                  The very first story submission guideline is “Do not editorialize story titles, but when the original story’s title has no context or is unclear, please change it.” It conveys what it needs to as it is, I’m not sure what else you would add without editorializing.

                                                                                                  1. 4

                                                                                                    I disagree that the story title has sufficient context and clarity to be presented as-is.

                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                      My feeling falls under

                                                                                                      when the original story’s title has no context or is unclear, please change it.

                                                                                                      Adding “A secure runtime for JavaScript and TypeScript” would not be editorializing

                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                        “Deno 1.0: A Node reboot”..?

                                                                                                        1. 12

                                                                                                          That’s definitely editorializing.

                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                            “A potential Node successor”, then? The article doesn’t use the word ‘reboot’, but apart from that it positions Deno as

                                                                                                            • Deno is intended for the niche now served by Node
                                                                                                            • Deno builds on what the authors learned while building Node
                                                                                                            • Deno does things that Node does, but better
                                                                                                            • Deno, being a new project, can fix things that can not easily be fixed in Node itself

                                                                                                            Hell, even the name is an anagram of Node.

                                                                                                            I’m not asking you to endorse the word ‘reboot’ like I do; but why does it feel like ‘editorializing’ to you; in other words, feel like it’s more like opinion than description?

                                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                                      C++ programming language. After trying different things over the years, I can dare to say that C++ is a terrible language when it comes to writing GUIs. Instead of focusing on the problem that your GUI is trying to solve you find yourself performing workarounds around the language quirks (e.g: string split is still missing from the standard library in 2020). A grizzled C++ veteran will probably scoff at this statement while carefully copying his string split implementation from the previous project [2].

                                                                                                      Reality seems to disagree, given the evidence that most GUI applications are written in C++, or at least use GUI toolkits written in C++.

                                                                                                      And I’m hardly a “grizzled C++ veteran”, but the author has a pretty outdated view of C++. In the specific case of string splitting, the defacto standard way of doing it is boost::split. Whether that belongs in the standard library or not is a matter of opinion, but historically C++ hasn’t been a “batteries included” language.

                                                                                                      1. 2

                                                                                                        I don’t like comments like these. If someone says that a language that they’ve used is bad for them at a certain task, they are right. Even if the wording they use isn’t particularly to your liking, such as by being especially hyperbolic, what they’re expressing is a quality they perceived in their own subjective experience of a language, and the manifestation of language is naught but the collective subjective experiences of that language. If programs were developed completely in isolation from humans, we could perhaps shift the lens to a simple quantitative approach, but that’s simply not true. Software is social, and if people are overwhelmingly complaining about something in a programming language, no matter how trite or “wrong” you believe they are being, what does it actually accomplish to tell them they should simply change their mind about that feeling?

                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                          If someone says that a language that they’ve used is bad for them at a certain task, they are right.

                                                                                                          I agree, but the author stated it as a fact, not his opinion.

                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                            That’s what I meant by hyperbole. It’s still at the end of the day their opinion that it’s a fact, so the same applies.

                                                                                                      1. 5

                                                                                                        Reply to Cons of Qt:

                                                                                                        QT website is one big clusterfuck of corporate bullshit and hard to find stuff. They keep redesigning it and every year its getting worse and worse. It’s impossible to find relevant information for your questions and your best bet is relying on the search engine.

                                                                                                        I use duck.com and it always finds what I need for Qt, example: QMessageBox Qt

                                                                                                        QT is available under LGPL license which prohibits you from statically linking your application without releasing the source code. Maybe that’s not such a big issue but I personally prefer statically linked blobs over the mess that is caused with shared libraries. You can always buy a commercial license that gives you the rights to statically link your application but it comes with a hefty price (if you are even able to find that information on their shoddy website).

                                                                                                        Yeah, whatever. If you make money - pay, if you don’t - it is free.

                                                                                                        Some developers don’t like the QT’s MOC (Meta Object Compiler) that is used for signals and slots. I don’t have an opinion about that. C++ lacks introspection features and sometimes you have to create a workarounds with such code generation nonsense.

                                                                                                        Holywar-like con. Qt has official Python bindings: https://www.qt.io/qt-for-python

                                                                                                        They keep piling stuff on top of QT like QML, so you can finally write your app in Javascript or something. I asked people who are writing QT apps professionally and apparently they are still writing everything in C++ (QtWidgets or however they call it).

                                                                                                        It is possible to write C++ or Python.

                                                                                                        Chart components are missing. This entirely depends on the field you are working in, but I often find myself adding a chart to the application. Charts are not part of the QT and you have to find the library that does this for you. Make sure to check their licenses as they are often under GPL license, and you have to buy commercial license if you don’t want to release the source code of your app.

                                                                                                        With Python bindings it is possible to hook up matplotlib: https://matplotlib.org/3.1.3/gallery/user_interfaces/embedding_in_qt_sgskip.html

                                                                                                        C++ programming language. After trying different things over the years, I can dare to say that C++ is a terrible language when it comes to writing GUIs. Instead of focusing on the problem that your GUI is trying to solve you find yourself performing workarounds around the language quirks (e.g: string split is still missing from the standard library in 2020). A grizzled C++ veteran will probably scoff at this statement while carefully copying his string split implementation from the previous project [2].

                                                                                                        Qt has official Python bindings: https://www.qt.io/qt-for-python

                                                                                                        Note: Not affiliated with Qt. Using Qt for work.

                                                                                                        1. 4

                                                                                                          You said “you can write Qt in Python” half a dozen times but the author already wrote about that on the bottom of the article.

                                                                                                          A sharp eye will catch the blasphemy I dared to write down and argue how the bindings exist and you can actually use X programming language to develop in Y framework. Yes the bindings exist but in my limited experience they were quite lacking to the point of uselessness. The documentation was often missing and the tutorials were harder to find if you were even able to find anything. In the end if you have to rely on the documentation of the framework’s primary programming language, you may as well write the entire application in that language instead of fooling around with the half done bindings.

                                                                                                          I personally don’t like python so I’ve never written Qt with python but ime everywhere else this appears universally true. Language binding interfaces, especially in the case of high level scripty languages, will always be second class citizens, and you’ll always have to choose between kludgy use patterns or imposing a restrictive abstraction on top of the bindings.

                                                                                                          1. 0

                                                                                                            I’ve never written Qt with python

                                                                                                            will always be second class citizens

                                                                                                            Do you have a proof of that? otherwise is FUD.

                                                                                                            1. 5

                                                                                                              The proof is tautological. Qt is primarily developed around C++, and therefor there will always be inconsistencies in translating those interfaces into other languages. Tell me, does Qt use python’s string representation or does it use their own C++ string representation? Is Python’s nondeterministic garbage collection simply not an issue in relation to Qt’s expectations for destructor call order? Is Qt’s API design oriented around Python’s type system or C++’s?

                                                                                                              1. 1

                                                                                                                It is very easy to write correct interfaces between C (and thus C++) and Python. CPython is written in C. So I don’t understand your concern.

                                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                                  Yes, and GHC is written with C so code interacting between C and Haskell should have zero caveats, right? You didn’t respond in concrete to any of my questions, by the way.

                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                    I didn’t say it should have zero caveats. I said it is easy to make it work.

                                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                                      You asked for proof that python for qt, like all other gui language bindings, was a second class citizen. I provided proof :)

                                                                                                        1. 13

                                                                                                          I don’t believe the logic behind the EARN IT act adds up. If we ban things because unsavory people use them then why does the US allow guns, for example?

                                                                                                          This excerpt summarizes a majority of the article, and I think it exemplifies a particularly weak line of argument. People will be more likely to be convinced a law is right or not by you elaborating on what it does and how that effects them than they would be because you’ve moralized the pretenses under which it was passed. Case in point since you mention them just after that, the NRA has been pushing the “most gun owners are good guys!” angle for a very long time and it’s done little but intensify the ire of people they might be trying to sway. Saying “we shouldn’t ban encryption because not everyone that uses encryption is a pedophile” doesn’t exactly make the strongest case.

                                                                                                          1. 8

                                                                                                            the NRA has been pushing the “most gun owners are good guys!” angle for a very long time and it’s done little but intensify the ire of people they might be trying to sway.

                                                                                                            I think part of the issue is that the NRA isn’t always trying to sway the other side with this line. They’re often trying to rally support on their side. As such, I see using the same line of argument as useful in helping people on the right who may not normally identify with a tech issue to see it in the same way they view their gun rights.

                                                                                                            1. 3

                                                                                                              While I agree with most of what you’re saying, there just has to be a better way to combat illegal sexual exploitation than this. As much as I don’t like that it is still a big thing on the internet, removing encryption is not the solution.

                                                                                                              1. 5

                                                                                                                Sexual exploitation of kids was a thing before the internet was a consumer thing. Those who partake in such despicable acts will just find another way to do what they do if online transit is no longer practical or safe. And then we’ll have no legitimate encryption, and still have sexual exploitation of kids.

                                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                                  I’m not against encryption either. Maybe if you really want to confront that part of the issue I think instead of talking about how it’s “not all encryption” I would personally take on the route of not only further exploring how futile it is to try to curb these crimes by pursuing them once they’re already being shared, but also showing how much more effective things like community programs might be at trying to fight the issue at its source.

                                                                                                                2. 3

                                                                                                                  Saying “we shouldn’t ban encryption because not everyone that uses encryption is a pedophile” doesn’t exactly make the strongest case.

                                                                                                                  Maybe it does, if one poses it as “encryption is the tool that allows you safely exchange, say, intimate pics with your partner, and financial information with your family members; if we ban it, your next-door neighbor could creep into your personal stuff”.

                                                                                                                  1. 3

                                                                                                                    That’s my point.

                                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                                  I’d honestly entirely forgotten about Ogg. Is it still a thing in a meaningful sense, what with the MP3 patents having expired?

                                                                                                                  1. 6

                                                                                                                    Ogg is a container format, able to hold different codecs inside, Vorbis is the codec designed to replace MP3. Now Ogg is being used with the Opus codec, with quite success.

                                                                                                                    1. 3

                                                                                                                      Ugh, I thought that Opus had its own container format/was using MKV already …

                                                                                                                      Tried to parse Ogg once, wouldn’t recommend.

                                                                                                                    2. 6

                                                                                                                      Spotify uses ogg vorbis for streaming to their apps: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spotify#Technical_information

                                                                                                                      1. 5

                                                                                                                        Ogg vorbis file size pretty regularly beat out vbr mp3’s at the max setting I could distinguish in a blind listening test. If a lossless source is available I always prefer encoding vorbis myself for use on my own (non internet) music player! The criticisms of the Ogg container make sense though. I’ve never really seen Vorbis in any other container tbh.

                                                                                                                        1. 3

                                                                                                                          Old-style WebM files used Vorbis in a Matroska container.

                                                                                                                    1. 4

                                                                                                                      Making pasties, marathoning John Wick, and rationing beer.

                                                                                                                      1. 8

                                                                                                                        From that site’s CSS:

                                                                                                                        ::-moz-selection,
                                                                                                                        ::selection {
                                                                                                                         background:white
                                                                                                                        }
                                                                                                                        

                                                                                                                        This is more insidious than anything I’ve seen anyone complain about blogs doing on here. I spent several seconds drag clicking wondering if Firefox locked up. I actually have no idea what drove this person to do this.

                                                                                                                        1. 3

                                                                                                                          I dealt with this trying to copy and paste the title! I thought I was hallucinating!

                                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                                            It appears the author’s removed this property now.

                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                          This’ll be incredibly useful, awesome.

                                                                                                                          1. 43

                                                                                                                            I hope this makes more businesses realize that people can work from home 90% of the time for a great many positions. The amount of time saved, gas saved, and stress saved is immense….not to mention the amount saved on office space and associated costs.

                                                                                                                            1. 6

                                                                                                                              I’ve been working from home for over a week and I’ve been much happier.

                                                                                                                              I just need to go for a walk around my neighborhood each day to at least leave the house. I never go for a walk when I go to the office. Its nice, I went around and took some photos on my Nikon FE2 today (been getting back into film recently)

                                                                                                                              1. 7

                                                                                                                                I got a dog to force me get out every day and it’s rewarding in many ways.

                                                                                                                              2. 3

                                                                                                                                I also hope this could be the case, but I think there’s also a possibility that it could have the opposite effect, owing to:

                                                                                                                                1. Rushing into it without time to prepare and test remote-working infrastructure.
                                                                                                                                2. Being forced to suddenly go all in, rather than easing themselves into it gradually by initially having some people working from home some of the time.

                                                                                                                                If a company experiences problems because of it, they might be more likely to dismiss the possibility in future.

                                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                                  Bram Cohen has a good Twitter thread about this - https://twitter.com/bramcohen/status/1235291382299926529 - “My office went full remote starting the beginning of this week related to covid-19 … This isn’t out of fear that going in to work is dangerous. It isn’t, at least not yet. It’s out of concern for not spreading disease and erring on the side of going full remote sooner rather than later.” Making sure you can strikes me as a good idea.

                                                                                                                                2. 7

                                                                                                                                  If only I could work at McDonald’s from home. Sure would be nice if I could just receive a case of patties in the mail, cook them up, and mail them out. They have enough preservatives that it wouldn’t be an issue, right?

                                                                                                                                  1. 10

                                                                                                                                    There’s something that resonates about this. I wonder if these companies also encourage their data center engineers to work from home. Or even their cleaning and cafeteria staff. ‘Working from home’ requires an economic infrastructure that we expect to keep working, even though it requires people not to ‘work from home’.

                                                                                                                                    I’m absolutely sympathetic to the argument that not packing people together in tight spaces might, if we’re lucky, limit the spread of the virus. Maybe this is the wrong moment to wonder about the classist aspects of this.

                                                                                                                                    1. 31

                                                                                                                                      I think the idea of restricting workplace interaction gets a bit muddled in transmission.

                                                                                                                                      A pandemic of this kind is almost impossible to stop absent draconian quarantine practices.

                                                                                                                                      The point of getting (some) people not to take public transport, go to restaurants, hang out around the water cooler etc. is not to ensure that those people don’t get sick. A certain percentage of them will get sick, no matter what. The point is to slow the transmission, to flatten the curve of new illnesses, so that the existing care infrastructure can handle the inevitable illness cases without being overwhelmed.

                                                                                                                                      1. 6

                                                                                                                                        I’m not sure what is there about class. There are white collar jobs that can’t be remote, like doctors. And there are some blue collar ones that can, like customer support by phone.

                                                                                                                                        1. 11

                                                                                                                                          There are always exceptions. But in general, “knowledge work” is both paid higher, and also allows the employee greater flexibility in choosing their place of work.

                                                                                                                                          1. 2

                                                                                                                                            Agreed with this take, yes.

                                                                                                                                          2. 8

                                                                                                                                            Many middle class jobs in the United States provide very few paid sick days, let alone jobs held by the working class. Paid sick leave is a rarity for part time jobs.

                                                                                                                                            People who hold multiple part time jobs to survive will face the choice of going to work while sick or self-isolating and losing their income.

                                                                                                                                            There’s absolutely a class component to consider, especially in America where social safety nets are especially weak.

                                                                                                                                            1. 1

                                                                                                                                              While it’s true that not all doctors can work remotely and others can’t all the time, telemedicine is a significant and growing part of the medical profession. Turns out there’s a lot of medicine that does not require in-person presence.

                                                                                                                                          3. 0

                                                                                                                                            What do you think this comment possibly adds to the conversation except being snide?

                                                                                                                                        1. 14

                                                                                                                                          Unhelpful article. Complains about gitflow, makes no real recommendations beyond “ask questions of your team”.

                                                                                                                                          1. 24

                                                                                                                                            The whole point of the article is to advocate spending significant time & effort on original thinking about what works for you and your group, and why - instead of copying a neatly-documented workflow you found on the internet.

                                                                                                                                            Given that, what other kind of recommendations could it possibly make?

                                                                                                                                            (nb: I have a preference but no strong opinions on the topic - deriving your own workflow is actually pretty expensive and you might want to spend those cycles elsewhere, but I’ve had good yield from the exercise in one team).

                                                                                                                                            1. 4

                                                                                                                                              encouraging your team to communicate is great! if that was the main point, then the article should have been titled “talk with your team” and been filled with techniques for better communication. but the article i read mainly complained about a git pattern that lots of people find useful.

                                                                                                                                              1. 4

                                                                                                                                                The point isn’t simply to communicate, the point is to critically think about the workflow. The blog post contains the author’s critical thoughts on the workflow, and encourages people to think critically about their own workflows. Asking questions of one’s team is really a means to that end rather than the end itself.

                                                                                                                                                1. 0

                                                                                                                                                  Its easy to complain about something that’s causing you pain. Its harder and more useful to look for a better course of action that can alleviate the suffering. My problem with the article is that it complains alot about problems but talks very little about solutions.

                                                                                                                                                  (The problems described are real, I’ve experienced them myself)

                                                                                                                                                  1. 8

                                                                                                                                                    While I generally agree with this, it is very important to see what is being criticised.

                                                                                                                                                    git-flow is a heavy process that has to argue for its value at every corner. The “other option” is using unstructured branching and PRs to master.

                                                                                                                                                    It’s a general problem that processes are argued for by pointing out the absence of a replacement. Some processes can be removed without replacement.

                                                                                                                                                    1. 1

                                                                                                                                                      That’s a useful point, which would have been helpful if included in and expanded upon in the article. (Unless I missed it somehow?)

                                                                                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                                                                                        On that level, I definitely agree with you.

                                                                                                                                                        But the article in the end does make a case for reflection and inspecting your process. I think it’s a bit much to ask for what is essentially an essay to cover all the corners.

                                                                                                                                                      2. 1

                                                                                                                                                        I disagree strongly with the idea that GitHub-style pull requests should ever be considered the ‘default’ workflow with git.

                                                                                                                                                        1. 1

                                                                                                                                                          I neither suggested one or mind which PR style you use.

                                                                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                                                                            Well I extend that to all pull requests that aren’t git-pull-request. Sending patches is the default: it’s what git was designed around.

                                                                                                                                                          2. 1

                                                                                                                                                            What’s your thinking here? Or what are you advocating against? Can you point me towards any resources or your own thoughts on this?

                                                                                                                                                    2. 4

                                                                                                                                                      Why must every article critical of a topic take the paternal role of telling you what to do instead? Can’t you exercise the critical thinking yourself? There are likely hundreds of articles out there, some linked in this thread, about alternative version control workflows, and they’re not too hard to find. Flagged your reply series as “troll” because it adds nothing to the conversation except “the author didn’t write enough and so I didn’t like the article”.

                                                                                                                                                  2. 2

                                                                                                                                                    Please see my answer above for one very simple suggested workflow I’ve seen work well.

                                                                                                                                                    I think you may be going too far by labeling this ’unhelpful” because there is in fact no one size fits all solution, and the author is right about that, but I agree it could certainly be more helpful by offering some potential starting points for a solution.

                                                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                                                    What’s stopping anyone from scraping any of the public service alternatives you talked about, disrupting all supposed Privacy anyways?

                                                                                                                                                    1. 8

                                                                                                                                                      Scraping doesn’t give you someone’s IP/geolocation, login history timestamps/IPs/geolocations, other PII, or DMs.

                                                                                                                                                      Also, even if it did (it doesn’t), the user could then use Tor to mitigate and preserve their privacy. You can’t effectively use Tor with Discord.

                                                                                                                                                      1. 3

                                                                                                                                                        Geolocation/IP correlation isn’t that difficult when everyone uses the exact same usernames everywhere anyways. It’s highly unlikely, for example, that anyone on the Amethyst Discord is totally “google free”. And all it takes if they aren’t is for them to visit a single link with the necessary tracking pixel, no evil js required. As for secure DM’s, just use Keybase anyways if security is a requirement; I don’t think you should be posting secure anything onto a public board. And using TOR to mitigate all of this with an alternate identity so you can post on a public open source chat room? I don’t know, I just honestly don’t see the threat model, but I do see people using an exit node to evade an IP ban on a public service.

                                                                                                                                                    1. 10

                                                                                                                                                      This sadly feels like C++ will be bound by the part of the industry that just wants to live on legacy forever. So we’ll probably need to sacrifice C++ to them and use something new, if we want a modern C++.

                                                                                                                                                      1. 8

                                                                                                                                                        There are only two kinds of languages: the ones people complain about and the ones nobody uses.

                                                                                                                                                        -Bjarne Stroustrup

                                                                                                                                                        The commitment to backwards compatibility is one of the major reasons why C++ has gained such high adoption in industry. C++ is certainly not my favorite language, but being able to compile and run code from two or three decades ago without modification is massively important for infrastructure development, and few languages have demonstrated the same compatibility guarantees seen in C++.

                                                                                                                                                        1. 4

                                                                                                                                                          That Bjarne’s quote is annoying. It is obviously true (almost tautological), but completely sidesteps whether the complaints are valid or not.

                                                                                                                                                          Backwards compatibility with problems of the past was already a hard constraint for C++98, and now there’s 20 more years of C++ additions to be backwards-compatible with.

                                                                                                                                                        2. 6

                                                                                                                                                          d and rust are both solid options for a modern c++ if you don’t need the backward compatibility. as others have noted, legacy support is one of the major selling points of c++; there is no reason for them to give that up.

                                                                                                                                                          1. 4

                                                                                                                                                            Explain please. Why do you think that? I only see new tools to use but my projects are my own.

                                                                                                                                                            1. 6

                                                                                                                                                              It’s regarding the non-breaking of the API and rather deprecation of std::regex etc. They’re not breaking it because apparently the industry will fork it otherwise. So we’re stuck with some bad decisions like forever.

                                                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                because apparently the industry will fork it otherwise

                                                                                                                                                                Don’t they already fork it? Almost every C++ project seems to have some reimplementation of part of the standard library.

                                                                                                                                                                1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                  There’s a really big difference between forking the standard (whatwg-style) and avoiding a few of the features of the standard library in favor of your own alternative implementations.

                                                                                                                                                                  1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                    I very much doubt you’d see an industry fork. The companies with sufficient interest in C++ and the massive resources required to develop compilers are probably the ones pushing C++ forward.

                                                                                                                                                                    What you would be more likely to see is some companies that just stop upgrading and stick with the latest release which doesn’t break compatibility.

                                                                                                                                                                    If you did see any non-standard developments to said release, I expect they would be minor and not widely distributed. Those who are resistant to change are unlikely to be making big changes, and until relatively recently C++ has had very little in the way of a community that might coordinate a fork.

                                                                                                                                                            2. 4

                                                                                                                                                              Legacy code is code that’s worth keeping running. A significant part of C++’s value is in compatibility with that code.

                                                                                                                                                              Causing an incompatibility that would be at the kind of distance from C++ that Python 3 was from Python 2 just isn’t worth it. If compatibility constaints are loosened more, Rust already exists.

                                                                                                                                                              1. 3

                                                                                                                                                                Legacy code is code that’s worth keeping running.

                                                                                                                                                                Sure. The question is whether we have to keep punishing newly written code and new programmers (who weren’t even alive when C++’s poor decisions were made) with it.

                                                                                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                  A language called “C++” but incompatible with the C++ that existing code bases are written in wouldn’t solve problems for new programmers working on those code bases. That is, you can’t change a language spec and fundamentally alter design decisions that existing code already was built on.

                                                                                                                                                                  Constraints on newly-written code depend in how the new code intermingles with old code. New code interleaved tightly into existing C++ code is constained by existing C++. For code that doesn’t interact with C++ at all or interacts with C++ through a sufficiently identifiable interface doesn’t have to be in a language called “C++”.

                                                                                                                                                              2. 3

                                                                                                                                                                Agreed. I believe that this kind of “modern C++” is Rust; there just has to be a way to keep C++ experts and their design mentality away from core development. Otherwise Rust will end up like C++.

                                                                                                                                                                1. 3

                                                                                                                                                                  I’d disagree with a characterization that Rust is a modernized C++. I believe there are things in Rust that the people building C++ would love to have (epochs for example are a hot topic in that thread), but I don’t think it’s the language they would build if they could get out the chisel and compatibility break away not only ABI but maybe even syntactic decisions and more. Despite the lack of commitment so far to measly ABI breaks, with some of what’s seemingly in the pipeline really just transforming a lot of the day-to-day of working with C++, maybe all you’d need to end up with a “modern C++” is sort of a, uh “C+”. My personal choice for trimming to create a C+? Kill preprocessor directives with fire!

                                                                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                    I could have said more precisely:

                                                                                                                                                                    Rust is what C++ developers need. It’s not necessarily what they want.

                                                                                                                                                                  2. 2

                                                                                                                                                                    …there just has to be a way to keep C++ experts and their design mentality away from core development. Otherwise Rust will end up like C++.

                                                                                                                                                                    This comment makes me a bit sad. I understand the point that @soc is making, but I don’t think that the Rust community should ever be built on a foundation of keeping people out. The C++ community certainly struggles with a culture of complexity, but there is a lot that the C++ community can bring to the Rust community and vice versa.

                                                                                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                      That and a lot of Rust’s core team are C++ experts already.

                                                                                                                                                                      1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                        Every language is built around a set of values that result in a self-selection process for potential adopters:

                                                                                                                                                                        • The language has bad documentation? Keeps out people who think documentation is important. (See Scala.)
                                                                                                                                                                        • The language keeps adding features? Keeps out people who think that adding more features does not improve the language. (See C++, C#, JavaScript, Typescript, Swift, Rust, …)
                                                                                                                                                                        • Etc. etc.

                                                                                                                                                                        For instance point number 2 – I have decided that Rust 1.13 is roughly the max language size I’m willing to deal with when writing libraries.

                                                                                                                                                                        I have subsequently skipped all newer Rust versions and the features that were added in those versions. I can’t really “un-adopt” Rust, but I think I’m pretty far removed from usage that Rust devs would consider “mainstream”.

                                                                                                                                                                  1. 12

                                                                                                                                                                    It’s really interesting what on average seems to make lobste.rs users most vocal. Nowadays it seems that the easiest way to trigger dozens of lengthy essays is with perceived categories of bloat. Release an Electron app or post something on Medium, and the diatribes seemingly never end. On the other hand, write a C++ app with big memory leaks and a bunch of Boost libraries it doesn’t need, and you might get maybe one or two complaints. IMO, this dead horse has long been in latter stages of decay.

                                                                                                                                                                    1. 8

                                                                                                                                                                      I think it would have been really nice for UIs if web browsers had historically supported unix sockets as HTTP endpoints, so arbitrary programs could use the web browser as a local GUI without having to worry about exposing a sensitive API over TCP

                                                                                                                                                                      1. 4

                                                                                                                                                                        You can bind to 127.0.0.1

                                                                                                                                                                        1. 7

                                                                                                                                                                          That is not as good. With a unix socket, the listening process can set the usual user/group/other permissions. With a TCP socket on 127.0.0.1 you’re exposing your service to everything on the same machine.

                                                                                                                                                                          Plus TCP sockets suck at namespacing. Unix sockets are no worse at namespacing than the filesystem.

                                                                                                                                                                          1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                            even with things like dbus, there are limits to the security model of unix sockets. I’d much prefer a better capabilities system or we can just accept that auth has to be handled by the receiver in some fashion.

                                                                                                                                                                            1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                              We’re talking about using a browser as an alternative to a TUI. There would be little point worrying about any model more complicated than marking the socket 0600 because the user who started the tool is the one and only user you want to be able to access the tool’s API.

                                                                                                                                                                            2. -1

                                                                                                                                                                              you’re exposing your service to everything on the same machine

                                                                                                                                                                              Not if you’re using a jail.

                                                                                                                                                                              1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                                That’s a lot of effort for not a lot of payoff. I don’t remember BSD jails ever being usable by ordinary unprivileged users. ezjail meeded root for example. You’re going to have to put the browser in the same jail too if you want to limit access, which is kind of a non starter. You can’t grant access to only one uid or gid. They were ime always pretty slow and troublesome - you had to arrange a whole root filesystem for each, for starters.

                                                                                                                                                                                1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                                  I don’t remember BSD jails ever being usable by ordinary unprivileged users.

                                                                                                                                                                                  Which is one of the reasons why unprivileged/rootless containers as provided by e.g. podman are really promising.

                                                                                                                                                                                  1. 1

                                                                                                                                                                                    They were always incredibly useful IME.

                                                                                                                                                                                    1. 2

                                                                                                                                                                                      Yeah for like full time sysadmins to set up daemons to run for years. Not for one off things like we’re discussing here.

                                                                                                                                                                              2. 1

                                                                                                                                                                                Indeed, I’ve seen several applications do exactly this.

                                                                                                                                                                                For example Google Refine: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNccGtn3Wb0?t=1m12s