• 1 Post
  • 434 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 2nd, 2023

help-circle




  • Before I understood Docker, I used to have HA installed directly on bare metal side by side with other “desktop” apps.

    To be able to access devices, HA needs many different OS-level configurations (users, startup, binding serial ports, and much more I don’t have a clue about). It was a giant mess. The bare OS configuration was polluted with HA configurations. Worse, on updating HA, not only did these configurations change, the installation of HA changed enough that every update would break HA and even the bare OS would break in some ways because of configuration conflicts.

    Could this be managed properly through long term migration? Yeah, probably, but this is probably a ton of work, for which a purpose-built solution already exists: Docker. Between that and the extra layer of security afforded by dedicating an OS to HA (bare metal or virtualized), discouraging the installation of HA in a non-dedicated environment was a no brainer.




  • It’s funny that with all our technology, paper is still the most durable storage medium (under normal conditions) that doesn’t cost an arm and a leg.

    Sophistication often creates fragility. The human mind marvels at sophistication naturally; appreciation for resilience usually only comes after that fragile thing has broken. Of course it’s too late by then.

    All them young whipper snappers will continue to learn these life lessons the hard way, it seems.




  • This is not how patents work. At all.

    For one, patent owners are generally more than happy to license their technology to integrators, and even competitors, if there is money to be made.

    More importantly, patents cannot be used to get exclusivity on products. Rather, patents can only protect novel approaches to how a product is made or served.

    The patent system is designed to protect R&D costs exclusively, not some get out of jail card for anti trust. Of course, the patent office isn’t perfect, the system does get abused in anti-competitive ways. But in the end, it’s rare that that results in less consumer choice, because of licensing deals.





  • Your logic is sound, but backwards.

    Marriage is more analogous to a birthday. (A personal change in status)

    Wedding is more analogous to a birthday party (i.e. the event celebrating the change in status).

    As you pointed out in your logic, the birthday gift isn’t really about the birthday party, just like the ring doesn’t commemorate the wedding celebration, it commemorates your new marital status.

    Unless of course you are the kind of person that is so focused on the wedding celebration that you forget the reason why you are celebrating to begin with (spoiler: you are making a commitment and entering a new life stage).

    I think OP is on to something.


  • Well put.

    I think the desire for a national identity (Zionism) is fundamentally at odds with peaceful coexistence with neighbouring ethnic groups. Israel is definitely at a major disadvantage here. Most other ethnic groups have a “homeland” out of sheer geo-historical inertia. Though I wouldn’t call it a completely unique situation. We see the tensions arise from the protection (or lack thereof) of national identity all over the world to lesser degrees, especially as globalization creeps in.

    And I can empathize with groups that feel marginalized because of it. Though I think letting it boil over into violence is definitely a step too far.

    Besides, geography as a means of cultural protectionism may be an outdated idea. We can’t underestimate the importance of soft power for spreading cultural influence, and being in a state of constant conflict does not further that goal.

    In summary, I think Israel’s actions are rational at a tactical level, but ultimately fail to address the big picture you lay out.




  • “Conservative” means… to conserve. You (and everyone) gets more conservative as they age because you kinda want to conserve the status quo you, personally are used to.

    Here’s the thing: with social progress, what you want to conserve is different from what the generation before the progress wants to preserve.

    You are a conservative, as in conserving, of the progress that we have achieved. The “conservatives” you refer to, the “political right”, are not conservative. They are regressives, the opposite of progressives (though they might not like the connotation of that label, and will denounce it). These people would like to regress society to a time when these members of society had more consolidation of power (feudalism, fascism, racist/sexist segregation). Nothing “conservative” about that in terms of a human lifetime. In fact none of those people were around to experience what feudalism, fascism, segregation etc. was actually like. Many of these people may have been sold a lie by the 1% for the exclusive benefit of the 1%.