TheMiller

This thread made me laugh. I worked on network printing software in Banyan VINES a century or two ago, and my wife always wondered why I hated printing software so much. Everything about the printing software stack, especially in Windows, is terrible.

Washtenaw is certainly an affluent county, but not that rich. I live in another part of the county and used to work in Mauch's part of it; it's by no means mostly millionaires. I think the simplicity of the project's goal -- every household served, no exceptions -- is one of the reasons that it got off the ground.

A minor correction: West was bought by Thomson (no "p"), which later merged with Reuters to become Thomson Reuters.

Well, I still use some UML diagrams fairly often. Not so much for permanent or comprehensive system documentation, but to help me think through specific features or behaviors, and communicate these designs to others. I usually use a smallish subset of UML, because this usage doesn't require deep details.

I did give up on WYSIWYG tools for this, though. PlantUML support in VSCode is pretty good.

I do get it. I've been using it for several months, and I run into problems fairly often. Nothing wrong with the implementation, AFAICT, but it takes a fair amount of thought to assign sites to different containers, and you can easily end up following links that cross container boundaries and then don't work right because of the context change. I've even run into several corporate sites where federated authentication simply won't work in a container, at all.

I think this is a mischaracterization. The relational model which motivated relational DMBSs is based on predicate logic. Mappings to graphs are obvious, but are not the organizing principle. This was one of the strengths of the relational model, encouraging a more flexible view of the data than graph databases had previously offered. In a complex relational schema, you can discover and work with all kinds of implicit graphs that were not originally intended by the schema design.

> UBI is cargo cult finance. It's a broken mental model that will kill the system.

Such dismissiveness is unwarranted. There's a lot of intriguing research on the topic that indicates that it may be a cost-effective replacement for the byzantine social support systems of modern governments, with benefits for both recipients and taxpayers. It only seems like a broken model if you /start/ with an overly simplistic model of the current situation, e.g one that ignores both the existence and desirability of social support systems.

Unfortunately much of the research is frustratingly incomplete. Search e.g. for information on Mincome.

It also seems like a reasonable transition mechanism, from the market economies that have brought us increasing productivity, to a hoped-for post-scarcity future.

I second the recommendation for TheOldReader. It's where I eventually ended up after Google Reader's demise.

At least, it's not the normal case in the U.S. We call that a "holding tank", not a septic tank.

The rural township that I live in is considering the possibility of providing municipal broadband; hence my interest in this report.

From a security point of view, I am skeptical about the ACLU's recommendation in this report to provide open WiFi access points. Due to the danger of MITM attacks, I don't think it's a good idea to promote the use of open APs.

Discover had a service like this more than a decade ago, which I used quite a bit. But they shut it down after a few years.

It's no more of a "technicality" than the fact that some people happened to be born within the somewhat arbitrary borders of a particular nation, through no effort of their own, and thus happen to be considered citizens of that nation.

Actually, in that scenario, the campfire is more likely to be a health threat to asthmatic members of the public (about 7% in the U.S.) than the cigar!

> It was created by people who had no experience in databases and are learning as they go[4]. As they started adding things that are essential for database they realized it's not that simple.

This sounds exactly like what MySQL development looked like to me early in its rise to popularity.