buggymcbugfix

And this, ladies and gentlemen, is what we call enshittification!

lol good old ostrich algorithm

Agreed, I was also wondering about this. Maybe the aggressive checkpointing was for preventing WAL-overflow?

Not only are they funding open source, they are actively allowing users to host their own control plane via headscale which is a libre implementation of the tailscale control protocol and developed by an engineer who works for Tailscale by day. This instantly made me trust and like them, even if at first I was cautious because I naturally mistrust anything that gets a lot of hype. I've been running headscale on NixOS, hosting my own tailnet since last year and everything just works out of the box. Tailscale lives up to the hype! <3

Thanks for the nice article. The SQLite docs that explain this bug are emphatic about how utterly rare, even irreproducible it is. How, then, was it found, one wonders?

Thousands of cheeses, each of which is a unique experience. Heck, even the serving temperature completely alters the experience. Next: wines, charcuterie, ...

Pity the fool who can't taste the difference between any of these.

One reason I love writing production code in Ur/Web is that LLMs are incapable of synthesising something even remotely resembling it. Keeps me on my toes.

I think this is a great policy by the Zig team.

Whoa you were faster than me!

I am a sucker for underdog software (anyone else using Ur/Web in prod?) and I was instantly infatuated when I first came across Fossil. I wasted a week of my life trying to fall in love with it but actually realising all the little things that make Git awesome. Beautiful diff output. Staging changes in hunks. Fixup commits, interactive rebase with autosquash. Git lets you treat not just your code as art but also your code evolution. In Fossil you don't get to clean up your branch into a coherent story. No, every path to and from dead-end blood-soaked alleys stays with you forever, unless you just don't commit anything until you have smoothed over all the details. No committing and pushing your WIP code to keep it safe (I mean you can, but you cannot then ever undo that). I'm sure other people feel very differently and that's ok. But Git's UX is on a completely different planet, imho.

Yes, I am someone who, when my branch code-wise is ready to be merged, I will still take however long it needs to clean the history into a coherent, bisectable set of patches.

To be fair, Fossil is kinda cool in many ways, but it's a downgrade for my dev UX. Also the configuration interface for access controls and suchlike to the repo server, issue tracker, etc. is... eccentric. I wouldn't be surprised to find some incorrectly/unsafely configured repos in the wild.

I think this point is crucial:

> [...] would be roughly proportional to the strength of the friend network connecting them.

That is true! The system I mentioned above, which I had to refactor, was written in the worst Haskell that I've ever seen and nobody at the company dared touch it with a 10-foot pole.

You can't say...

> Not sure if tools and technologies can solve accidental complexity.

... and then say

> For me, consistent systematic naming and prefixes/suffixes to make names unique are a hint that a person is thinking about this or has experience with maintaining old systems. This has a huge effect on how well you can search, analyze, find usages, understand, replace, change.

I have battle scars from refactoring legacy systems where my predecessors did _not_ consistently or uniquely name things and I would not have seen it through without my sidekick, the type checker!

Getting AI vibes from this article? It is strangely repetitive and meandering. Also tell-tale "It's not X, it's Y" and sort of unspecific mostly.

Also, why would you have billions of open transactions? That is the implication I got from the article as someone who doesn't know anything about Postgres.

(I use SQLite and perhaps I have Stockholm syndrome, but I like how it pushes you towards a design with small transactions, ideally entirely database-side.)

EDIT: Yeah, gptzero says AI with 100% confidence.