runyor

This can be generalized to: Every time someone offers you a "deal of a lifetime" it's a deal that mostly benefits him. If it doesn't screw over a third person it usually screws you, and if it screws over someone else it still might screw you.

That's why the smart man will find deals himself. E.g. instead of waiting for a prospect from a cars dealer that makes him a good offer, he will study what makes a good second hand car, when the prices of second hand cars are lowest and then he will go and make an offer to a caring owner of a car to become its second hand owner.

It's a ridiculous rule, but really after one incident just accept it and move on. Next time book someone else. Don't make a review in other locations. (and then make a blog post, and then repost that blog post on another website)

I haven't done it for some time, but in my memory it was neither a problem on OSX nor on Linux with VBox. Maybe try Vagrant? I don't remember, sorry. But ask around and you should find a super easy way to make this happen.

Let's say you are right. Then we should discuss why Mars One is a scam and SpaceX isn't. And just saying "SpaceX has succeeded until now" is not really cutting it. Being a billionaire and probably having quite some parental and silicon valley network to make use of, Musk simply also had much better odds. But this is not something you or I couldn't have guessed when Mars One started. It's quite obvious.

So from what I can see you can't say one is a scam and the other isn't. Both are a gamble and the one succeeded until now while the other hasn't. A scam is, when they didn't even try to do anything. Or when they used the money to buy yachts instead of financing space base science. Is there something like this? If they sold a pipe dream and worked hard to try to make it become reality, imho, it's not enough to call it a scam.

As long as everybody is investing their time, money and health as free choice I think it's a good thing and we should support them.

Of course it's a pipe dream. Of course people will dump sh*tloads of money for no results. Of course people will die if they really start doing stuff like this. But is there really a way to achieve such kind of goal without such sacrifices?

I mean, you need to be able to use your VM Manager tool to find out what is the IP/hostname of your guest.

You open a shell on the host, and then `scp guest:path/to/file target/path/to/file`.

Too short text for that topic. Container world certainly needs a lot of storage problems resolved. So, why do containers not need this? What part of it do containers not need?

If you go this way, why not simply use SCP on the host?

Also you can compare it with the age below. Most people are 21-29 years old, but have 11+ years of experience? I think the meta-physics of the job market make people write bigger numbers than truthfully would apply.

A smarter way might be to ask when was the first month/year that one got paid for python dev work and then calculate the experience number oneself.

What most "right-wing" thinkers ignore is the fact that they consider excluding others IS THE REASON that people exclude THEM.

That's also part of what is freedom. Your freedom ends at the point where you limit the freedom of others. Otherwise the other person wouldn't be free.

That's also why most non-right-wing thinkers don't consider that another point of view, but simply selfish and asshole-ish.

Therefore if you want to argue your point, maybe you shouldn't highlight what you fight AGAINST (i.e. "left-wingers out", "refugees out") but what you fight FOR, which in some regards also boils down to respecting each other's freedom, right? Show that and you will find that doors will open for discussion.

I personally discuss with both people who would be defined as left-wing as well as with people who would be defined as right-wing. Both sides have reasonable people and some reasonable arguments, that are sadly sometimes hidden underneath many layers of bullshit.

Interesting is also that you can learn history much better outside of school. In contrast to education institutions youtubers for instance usually succeed at presenting the stuff in an interesting fashion. And if you listen to these kind of presentations in several languages or from diverse political influenced sources then you can also get a rather objective overview.

This series taught me in a few hours what I didn't learn in school over years: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yocja_N5s1I&list=PLBDA2E52FB...

A joke on one hand, a great inside on the other.

It is not just about allegiance seeking but also about beating other groups. And it's not just for fun but for zero-sum resources like budget, "more moral standpoint", natural resources, human resources, votes, views etc.

So altogether probably 3 points to consider (reason to do politics - zero-sum resources, challenges to succeed in - other teams try to get a bigger piece of the cake, and ways to achieve success - building alliances).

My problem with eve is that you think "oh this career path might be interesting", and then either you invest $300 or spend 3 months training in that direction, BEFORE YOU CAN TRY IT! Usually try or not is something a human wants to decide in a few days if he's patient.

I disagree with some of that. But first thanks for explaining more in-depth what is behind pijul. The main subthread I started because I didn't understand what it provides. If it can combine easier UX with more efficient diffing, then I think it is a very valuable contribution, actually.

Now some more in-depth bla bla if interesting:

> (AB)C = A(BC)

great feature request, I agree.

> This isn't always what happens in git

correct.

> because it doesn't work with patches on an abstract level. Instead, it always works with states

Incorrect though. States, patches, these are just trade-offs. You can represent either in the other completely. Like you can build a list using a tree structure if you just allow one branch. Or you can also build a tree on top of a list structure, if your traversal algorithm knows which item-index to pick for a certain subtree's children. All trade-offs.

That doesn't mean "Pijul does better diffs" would be wrong, though. It can still be the case. But it doesn't mean that git would need huge refactoring to also implement that better-diff-algorithm. In the end implementing this better algorithm in git might be trivial for a git core developer if you can explain to him how it works.

If you think about it a diff between two states has an unlimited way of being represented. And considering minimal steps to generate the diffs with adding lines to the diff and removing lines from the diff, the whole thing is an abstract tree. Basically to achieve associative patches one needs to make sure to always traverse this tree in the same order. Git traverses greedily though, using the very first diff that is good enough as a final result. Probably the idea behind this was also smart. Do it quickly for now, and optimize it if needed later.

Mastodon is the currently most hippest open source alternative to Twitter. Don't know many of the details tho.

A little less sceptical but still I wonder about the same thing. If all are connected, why care for which server I connect to? Are there filters between each server? Is my data only hosted in this server and goes down with it when the server hoster decides he invested enough into his hobby?

Why not summarize it a little if you feel that info got lost.

Technically if you need a patch you can generate it on the fly by comparing both objects (you can even do that in a bash script with `diff`, if you are willing to type in the logic to look up commit->tree->file->object-name first). So there shouldn't be anything lost. The only parameters I can see with storing diffs vs immutable objects is disk space vs processing time, which is also what git proofs by not storing old immutables and instead store diffs for old stuff (reducing space by increasing processing time).

Have you ever heard about docker, cr-io (not sure if this one can be used standalone), buildah, podman?

It probably won't be docker itself, but if you start deploy your stuff as docker containers now there will probably be a migration path to whatever it will be.

Did you get around if this works?

https://github.com/exul/matrix-rocketchat

This is unreasonable. First of all, often you don't need patches, so it's premature optimization. Second, git decided specifically for the actual-state version to have this key-object store, which means you throw away not just the disadvantages but the advantages as well. Last but not least, git ALSO STORES DIFFS when it packs stuff up, which is what happens if big amounts objects need to be transferred or big amounts of old data needs to be stored.

That doesn't mean pijul is a bad tool. I didn't check it out. And I really think for everyday coders who don't want to become git-gurus it would be nice to have a simpler git-like VCS, for instance.

But the marketing must be updated according to the facts. Try to find features that people really care about, e.g. ease of use, e.g. integration with build tooling and docker, e.g. better federation through more automation which makes centralized servers like github go away.