paffdragon
I've seen a few papers recently on the topic in terms of LLM, here is two I found by quick googling
* "Does Code Cleanliness Affect Coding Agents? A Controlled Minimal-Pair Study" https://arxiv.org/abs/2605.20049
"Our findings suggest that traditional maintainability principles remain highly relevant in the era of AI-driven development, shaping the computational cost and navigational efficiency of coding agents."
* "Code for Machines, Not Just Humans: Quantifying AI-Friendliness with Code Health Metrics" https://arxiv.org/abs/2601.02200
"Our findings confirm that human-friendly code is also more compatible with AI tooling."
"Investing in maintainability not only helps humans; it also prepares for large-scale AI adoption."
> If the code is ugly, but defects are low—does it matter? > If the code is hard to read, but clients are happy—should I care?
For you who wrote it and are the sole developer, maybe not. But if you want to have other contributors or hand it off, then it can be a problem. New devs joining the project may not want to work with it and will push for a rewrite that will cost money or need to spend extra time on working with code that is hard to work with for them which will cost money. And from the papers above it seems this also affects LLMs as well as they seem to work more efficiently with "cleaner" code.
Currently, I use Btrfs on Synology, mainly because snapshots and checksums are nice, but I never really did the work to do benchmarks against other FS. In the past my choice was Ext4 or XFS with LUKS/LVM, then Btrfs matured and since then I moved to it. So far I had no issues, but YMMV, some people consider it still not entirely reliable, but I do backups. I'm setting up a FreeBSD server where ZFS was the natural choice, again snapshots, boot environments, native encryption and just maturity/reliability. I haven't considered OpenZFS yet, mainly because my Synology does not support it, but your benchmarks have some interesting numbers, when I'll have again enough money for some new HDDs I may give it a try.
I really think this cookie consent concept should have been a browser functionality, so I can make my default choice for all sites and be done with it.
$ ls -ld /tmp
drwxrwx--x. 2 shell shell 40 Jan 15 2022 /tmp
edit: sorry, I should have added this is termux :)Regarding the use of LLM for picking infra. The issue I usually have with such task is that they frequently omit things - either from the list of options or the features compared. And depending on my familiarity with the topic, I might never notice, which might steer my decision making into a different direction. Basically a certain bias. Sometimes prompting it to repeat reveals more, but ultimately I end up hitting the search and doing my own research, then I might use the LLM again with now more knolwedge and data. Did you run into this too? What was your process?
I was looking to see why they landed on this stack, but there are no alternatives or evaluation criteria listed - given the generated article, I wonder how much of the infra was selected by an LLM.
I know there are userspace implementations, but can't remember the specifics rn and don't have my notes with me.
> kernel modules for iptables-nft
I think you meant nftables. The iptables-nft package is meant to provide iptables interface for nftables for code that still expects that, afaik. I didn't run into that issue yet (knock-knock). According to docs nftables is available since kernel 3.13, so in theory it might be possible to build the modules for Synology.
However, I don't think I will be buying another Synology in the future, mainly because of other issues like they restricting what RAM I can use or what I want to use the M2 slots for, or their recent experiment with trying to push their own drives only, etc. I might give TrueNAS a try if I am not bored enough to just build one on top of a general purpose OS...
Edit: I just checked Grafana and cadvisor reports 23 containers.
Edit2: 4.4.302+ (2022) is my kernel version, there might be specific tools that require more recent kernels, of course, but I was so far lucky enough to not run into those.
If you have OPNSense, it has an ACME plugin with Synology action. I use that to automatically renew and push a cert to the NAS.
That said, since I like to tinker, Synology feels a bit restricted, indeed. Although there is some value in a stable core system (like these immutable distros from Fedora Atomic).
Axiom introduces metrics: High-cardinality without the cost
https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=last24h&page=0&prefix=fals...
Their packaging and delivery quality is one of the worst. But they are still responsive to customer requests, although that is going down the sewer as well. I get often responses that look LLM/chatbot generated and often not answering my question. Or they try something like, sure I'll get you the refund as soon as you place the order again. Then I insist they refund now and so far I always got my money back.
So, basically their advantage for me is their sortiment (but you need to navigate through a lot of fake and garbage products), free returns and quick refund (often even without a return). But this is not a very strong one and I very rarely open their website - the pile of low quality listing is so off-putting that I generally avoid.
I set it up a long time ago this way and I'm unsure of I had to somehow configure Gmail to be able to send from my other account. But I have the same also for @live.com and @zoho.com as I was trying different providers. This allows me to easily reply to forwarded emails with the old email addresses.
Edit: I think you got with the alias, didn't know this is what is called in Google https://support.google.com/mail/answer/22370?hl=en#zippy=%2C...
Re offlineimap, just looked into isync/mbsync suggested here by others, it seems better from the description, I'm probably going to try it when I have some time: https://people.kernel.org/mcgrof/replacing-offlineimap-with-...