HN user

kmacleod

66 karma

Ken (Bitsko) MacLeod

Jeeper. Tech enthusiast. Go-to expert for Automation, Cloud, AI, and DevOps.

Posts0
Comments46
View on HN
No posts found.

Possibly very much like Usenet. In the 80s there was a distributed "Slack-like" (for lack of a better description) distributed BBS network called Citadel (still some sites around now Internet based).

I wrote a UUCP clone and UseNet gateway for CitNet and made it available through a Citadel BBS "newsreader" to callers.

"uccico unidel ken bitsko macleod" still brings up some results[0]

[0] https://groups.google.com/g/alt.bbs/c/QFvfoxxONGU

If your editor has a wiki mode (like Emacs' org mode) then maybe nothing. If not, then Obsidian is your browser and your editor is your editor. For example, git syncing between Android and desktop isn't working well for me, so I edit directly in github UI and browse in Obsidian. The fact that Obsidian works exactly like that is one of the biggest benefits of Obsidian.

I've created and managed five distributions for two companies. I've found RPM to have slightly easier tooling across the whole stack, from developers building individual RPMs/specs up through building and managing 1000s of RPMs across multiple releases. The Fedora build model makes a great reference and source of tools for spinning your own distributions.

The Free Software Foundation (FSF), as the author of the GPL and LGPL licenses, maintains that any software running in the same process space qualifies as "linked" under the terms of these licenses. This includes dynamic and static linking, plug-ins, loadable modules, and, in some cases, even interpreted code.

However, some developers who use GPL licenses interpret these requirements differently and permit certain uses that the FSF does not. A notable example is the Linux kernel, which allows proprietary kernel modules under specific conditions.

For proprietary software authors, the best-case scenario is having to convince a court that the license they accepted, by redistributing GPL-licensed software, permits linking without the obligation to disclose their own source code, as otherwise required by the license.

Permissibly licensed software does not require you to provide sources or the changes to it.

Copyleft licenses require the source, including changes, to be provided.

The original purpose of copyleft is roughly the "right to repair". When you buy a product: you receive the necessary source, build instructions, and tools in some cases, to update and replace the software you received. The use of copyleft software passes those requirements on through proprietary users.

Note that one can still build a proprietary product as long as all the copyleft pass-through software can be modified and replaced on the product.

Red Hat, SUSE, Canonical, and myself, among many, "sell" GPL software that are used by others as part of their proprietary products.

Each of those, and the customers, are required to make the source they received (not their own proprietary source), including changes, available to those that receive the software (thus indirectly back to the public and the authors). AGPL is similar but includes the case of providing sources for products used in Internet services.

I may be misunderstanding, but I'm not sure I want a "remote desktop" where every process runs on the remote.

I want the original promise of X, where I choose where apps run and they are displayed locally:

• Run CAD circuit layout app on Pro server.

• Run Adobe Premiere on GPU server.

• Run distributed `make` on build cluster.

And of course, I want to be billed in resource-seconds, not per hour of a host made available to me.

Just a data point, no argument:

My 2025 Tesla stops for road work flaggers spinning their signs from "Slow" to "Stop".

This issue here, correctly, is that it should come to a stop for 1) a bus flashing red, 2) with or without stop signs, 3) on an undivided road. Or, in our automated future, at least come to a crawl like FSD does now when entering a parking lot or pedestrian likely location.

The packaging model of distribution is ubiquitous. Every distribution does the same thing just using different control files and tools. The differentiation between distributions is all in their packaging policies and platform decisions. In a loose way Unix (SysV, HP, AIX) started packaging before Linux but Linux said "Every project is its own package" and ran with it. The de-facto "Download release; apply patches; configure; make; make install; collect files" is present in every distribution package. Everything up through deployment is the same pattern across all distributions.

How do you get yours to drive into a parking lot and park correctly? My HW4/v13.2.8 gets indecisive and ignores lines when getting to a destination. I always have to disengage before I can use parking mode.

We implemented a low-power wireless sensing device on a microcontroller using asynchronous coroutines in C to replace eight state machines. It was a dream. Every operation process was clearly "linear" in readability while overlapping radio frequency hopping, sensor power-up/down sequencing, sense state, transmission, firmware update, etc. All while going into low-power mode until the next event to process.

Voyage from Yesteryear (1982), James P. Hogan is my favorite. Essentially, yes, the robots can do better once shown but people create because it's enjoyable and, where desired, robots produce copies or maintain. The robots in this case have also been instructed to encourage human leadership and stay out of the way of it.

When I did the pre-2020 deep-dive I found the studies to be uniformly about the mechanics of the mask (hole size and particle size) and therefore the conclusions uniform on that front.

It was only after 2020 that any studies were done on effectiveness in use. The results are a lot more positive there. However, it was still difficult to do controlled studies so the results aren't as strong as one would like.

As for general principles, if one’s packer, containerfile, cloud-init, bash, ansible, or puppet is much more than “install packages, set keys and a small amount of per-environment config, and start services,” it is likely that local packages are not being used effectively.

I've long envisioned a glue architecture around a scalable SmallTalk core. The ST bytecode can be run on various size compute cores from 8-bits to 64-bits. All the ST does is handle code flow. All compute is handed off to co-processors (Integer, floating-point, matrix, GPU, etc). The compute functions can be correspondingly scaled based on family design. The general goal is to allow thousands of cooperating compute processors with edge processors for communication.

I don't know why you're getting downvoted.

I used to work for a PRT (podcar) company and for anything up to a large commuter train or major New York subway, compared seat-mile for seat-mile the networks of small vehicles are just as efficient as most urban transit. And then as a bonus you get no-transfer, direct point-to-point commutes. Even the loading and unloading is comparable between them for stadium event traffic.