It was on the frontpage since yesterday. And the minute it drops off the frontpage, it gets spammed to the frontpage again. Unbelievable. Not only that another NPR story got spammed to the frontpage at the same time. Now that's interesting.
How can a frontpage based on user votes contain spam? Seems like you're implying something nefarious going on in order to explain a huge + impactful story's presence here?
Last few months this place is turned into reddit as the Reddit folks are exiled and leave in masses that site is just fake user accounts or maybe like 500 people with 5 million accounts. Real users are coming over here remembering that they can actually post stuff and it's screwing up this entire site. Because they vote brigade echo chamber stories.
Neocities.org seems ideal for this. I personally use the free tier of netlify at the moment, but I'm considering switching to neocities instead since I just have simple personal stuff to serve and I like the neocities ethos.
If you do this with redirections then file.txt will be truncated before it's been processed, leaving you with an empty file instead of what you wanted. Sponge collects its input first and then writes everything out at the end, so you can output to a file that was used as an input.
Commands that process file in place (sed -i) write to a temporary file in the same filesystem and then rename to the target file, which works if you want to process files that don't fit into memory.
I apologise, I was speaking loosely. I don't know if sponge collects input in memory or in a file. (Frankly I've never needed to care since the files I've ever needed this tool for have all been small)
I follow several artists and get lovely art that I wouldn't otherwise have seen, and wouldn't have sought out.
I follow several people in the game development industry, and historically used to see a lot of interesting technical articles being shared on Twitter within this community. That seems to have declined unfortunately, though there is still some.
I follow various people who have a habit of posting dumb funny jokes (usually puns) and memes. Not everyone likes that style of humour, but I do.
I mute or unfollow people if too many of the things they choose to share are things I don't want to see (like outrage bait).
Unless it's also a non-cryptographic hash then I don't see how a timing attack does anything interesting here. Timing will potentially tell you how many bytes of the hash match. But finding a password that produces a hash that matches the first N bytes does not help you find a password that matches the N+1th byte, so you're still just left with a brute force attack.
What am I missing? (Genuinely curious - I'm not a crypto expert)
You can still gain efficiency by centralising services. If you have centralised services you need some mechanism to coordinate them and make decisions about how they should work, and those decisions should ideally take input from the people using the services. Even in a no-bad-actors world you still have many different competing interests to balance due to different people's needs and preferences, so you probably want some kind of polling/citizens forum/whatever to gather input for making decisions, and an organisation that looks at all the details and makes the decisions on behalf of the collective.
Or by example: You still want someone to organise weekly garbage collection efficiently and equitably. The government does that.
Regular private companies work pretty well for coordinating and providing paid for services. Especially something like garbage collection.
Of course, details depend for example on what our 'no bad actor' assumption actually means, and perhaps on what ideas you have about human nature and history.
> Even in a no-bad-actors world you still have many different competing interests to balance due to different people's needs and preferences, so you probably want some kind of polling/citizens forum/whatever to gather input for making decisions, and an organisation that looks at all the details and makes the decisions on behalf of the collective.
Yes, you'll want some kind of organisation. My comment was just that the organisation would probably not look like a monarchy, benevolent or otherwise.
Because cancerous cells prioritize their own growth over the health of the wider system in which they exist.
Companies with this mindset do not reach a point at which they say "ok, we're big enough now". There is no target size they're trying to reach, there is only a target year-over-year multiplicative growth rate. They prioritize growth over providing value to the users they have. They grow without regard for the effect it has on social dynamics within the system (changing what the product is good for and what it's bad for), or the effect it has on social dynamics beyond the system.
It's the Paperclip Maximizer approach to business. And, of course, it's the stock market approach to business too.
Google is a web company; they want people to use the web. They made a laptop/desktop operating system built around their web browser, because they want everything to be on the web. It does most of the things you list, including synchronizing between devices since your data is all "in the Cloud".
As for market share, I'm not sure what power you think Google has, but getting 10% of the desktop OS market has got to be pretty difficult for anyone. I do not know what share of the market Chrome OS has.
No. I mean a full-fledged alternative to the major operating systems. Do people in charge of Chrome OS say "In 5 years, we want developers, designers and project managers at Google use this OS"? I don't think so - it's not their ambition to compete with Mac OS or Linux.
I'm really enjoying ChromeOS for software dev. The Linux container is tightly integrated with the rest of the OS. On top of that I can run all my favorite Android apps as well, making it an excellent OS for personal use.
One interesting example is that if I have a file I want to open, it doesn't matter if it's Chrome, Android, or Linux that has the executable to open it. I just click the file and it opens in the right app. I can also open it in any other apps via a dialogue that lists things I can open it with. The list shows all relevant Android and Linux apps.
The app launcher is similar -- all apps, regardless of how they are run, show up together.
I'm still not sure I could give up my Mac for my day job, but for personal use, I love it.
As others have mentioned, it's an officially supported feature and it's well integrated into ChromeOS itself. It's still "Beta", but it's now in a really solid state.
Perhaps you would like to share a screenshot or a pointer to some documentation. Chrome OS forces users to sign in to run apps and use extensions. Sounds like this is no better than crouton or crostini.
This feature is Crostini. I now know you have either half knowledge or are intentionally posting in bad faith.
You don't need to turn developer mode on for this feature. That means you get verified boot , updates (including your Linux distro) as well as the security guarantees of Chrome OS. Crouton requires you to give up all of that. You can't get sync without signing in. Cloud sync is the foundation of the OS. It's what makes it stateless. If you don't like that it's not for you but stop spreading half truths about the product in bad faith.
Ok, but the Linux container is completely at odds with Google's ChromeOS pitch.
Google says that ChromeOS has "simple setup" - but not the Linux parts. They say you can "search anything on your Chromebook" - but not Linux. They talk about "Chrome sync" - doesn't apply to Linux. Etc.
I think that ChromeOS has value as a web-browser host, and also as a development machine for vim-jockeys. What's missing is the middle part: a real desktop OS.
They don't say that, because that's not their goal. Google makes money from consumers being online, searching, browsing the internet, and using Google apps. It doesn't matter if that person is using Windows, Mac, Linux, or some imaginative Google OS to connect to the internet. They profit either way.
Another data point: I was an intern at Google last year and they gave most of the interns Pixelbooks. It worked fine for development (granted, development consisted of SSHing into a dev box and using a web-based IDE).
The whole point is that you can't fight the old "full-fledged" OS with a new one. The aim of the Google's web is to reduce the role of the OS to the "BIOS".
The problem with Chrome OS is that it's designed around treating your hardware like a kiosk. This is evident from design decisions like including an SSH console, but then disabling the escape sequences (see: https://codereview.chromium.org/5183004/).
ChromeOS does solve many of criteria listed by the GP, if one doesn't mind Google ecosystem; then a Chromebook is a good computing device at lower-medium price range[1].
Btw, people are already doing some interesting projects with Fuchsia like this desktop shell written in Flutter for a Fuchsia fork[2].
Chrome OS is not 100% open source and the bits that are not in Chromium OS are significant. It is also effectively tied to certain hardware. Users cannot easily install it on whatever hardware they choose.
The Chromium OS FAQ contains no link to download the source code and contains this little gem:
"Keep in mind that Chromium OS is not for general consumer use."
LOL a whole guide "secretly hidden" on the Internet, to get and build the source code.
Right above that line -
"Where can I download Chromium OS?
If you are the kind of developer who likes to build an open source operating system from scratch, you can follow the developer instructions to check out Chromium OS, build it and experiment with it. A number of sites have also posted pre-built binaries of Chromium OS. However, these downloads are not verified by Google, therefore please ensure you trust the site you are downloading these from."
What if the user is not "the kind of developer who likes to build an open source operating system form scratch"?
The fact is that this FAQ on www.chromium.org gives no pointers into Google Git to find the files to which you refer. It does not even give a link to chromium.googlesource.org, aside from the BSD license. If the reader following the "For everyone" link is not a developer, not a "UI designer" and not a "Contributor", she does not want to be treated like those types of people, she just wants the source code. If she were a developer she would have followed the "For developers" link at www.chromium.org. Interestingly, there is no "For users" link at www.chromium.org.
Not everyone looking for source code is a "developer", or thinks like one, and even if they are a developer, they may not be one "who likes build an open source OS from scratch".
I am an end user, not a developer, and I have been building an open source OS from source code for over 15 years. This FAQ makes some bold assumptions about end users. I do not believe that calling this out is "disingenuous", a "put down", nor "snark", at least, not according to the definition of that term I found on FOLDOC. I have always run my customised systems in a configuration similar to what Google calls "developer mode" (in fact, I use a more flexible, simpler configuration), however I am not a developer. The name "developer mode" is suggestive and silly.
One does not need to be a "developer", or think like one, to read, edit, write or compile software. Google seems to prefer to pretend such users do not exist. A Chrome OS user who is not a developer, UI designer nor contributor who wants the source code gets funnelled to the Chromium OS website, and then is provided with the advice to "follow the developer instructions". No link to the source code, or even to the "For developers" section. Too add to this, the user is given the caveat that "Chromium OS is not for general consumer use". This "For everyone" page is a dead end for non-developer users who want source code.
Imagine you are a "general consumer", i.e., an end-user, who is told Chrome OS is "open source". You go looking for the source code tree and tarballs and you are directed to Chromium OS. Then you arrive at www.chromium.org and are told Chromium OS is "not intended for general consumer use" and "if you a developer who likes to build an open source operating system from scratch you can follow the developer instructions". This is extremely presumptuous.
Nor everyone who wants to see the source code wants to build Chromium OS. Building "modern" web browsers like Chrome from scratch is unreasonably resource intensive. Some people may not want to read through all the opinionated developer instructions whose primary audience appears to be Google staff. Some people just want the source code to Chrome OS. That's it.
Yes, people not working for Google can get it. I can get it (with some effort). I never said otherwise. However, as I pointed out, it is "Chromium OS" not "Chrome OS" and there is a lot of cult-like mumbo jumbo for non-Google staff to wade through in order to find what one is looking for. The "open source" OS is Chromium OS not Chrome OS. That is not a "half-truth" it is a fact. Is all this a deterrent for those interested in Chrome OS source code? That is for the reader to decide. I think it could be made easier but that is only my opinion.
I posit that whether a search should be "local" or "global" is much more a factor of what is being searched for than who is searching. If I search for a barber I want local results, and I expect that that would be true for most people. If I search for a weird error message I saw while using my computer I want global results, and again I expect that is true for most people.
If true, then DDG could apply the same heuristics about location-sensitivity for everyone's searches and improve the results for everyone, without any tracking of detailed individual preferences.
You referred to it as "the single most cost effective way to speed up math and physics research". I don't think it's so surprising that people are interpreting that to mean you think LaTeX is a bottleneck in the research process.
I guess you intended emphasis on the "cost effective" part of the statement, but not everyone will read it like that (I didn't).
