elcdodedocle

GDPR is more than that. Consent or not, there are things bad actors can do in the USA that in the EU they just can't. Specially to children and vulnerable people. GDPR is an integral part of it. This is a small but significant first step in the right direction. Long way ahead still.

The closest to a short answer I can give: I have been infatuated with this industry (not just AI, but tech in general) since I was a kid in the 80s. I have seen lots of hype. Nothing even close to this. That is already a very good reason: That it can simply tank the economy and have even worse consequences if we put too much faith in it. And I think there is pretty solid evidence that we are, but let's not get into it. Even if the hype turned out to be justified (It never is), it would still suck at so many levels: The version that is being pushed onto us is the worst possible one. It's a lead-in-gasoline asbestos-in-everything darkest-timeline type of event, only bigger. It basically promises to turn all of us into mere line operators of a dystopian knowledge stealing & gate-keeping machine that we can't own or control. I can't see how it benefits anything or anyone except from some megayatch-owning suborbital-flying useless jerks and their island visiting friends. How can a community of people built around using our brains to produce awesome things be excited about a product that is essentially designed for us to get lazy and turn them off to pay for someone else's statistical approach to it as yet another enshittified service?

I understand the frustration. I have the uttermost reverence for distro maintainers and I love distro repos. I like that my OS is a consistent and well thought suite of aligned tools mindfully put together by a collective that knows what they are doing and test that it all fits and plays nice much better than I do. Please stop treating these awesome people like some kind of authoritarian ogres. I am grateful for flatpaks too. I understand that tools seldomly need to be tightly coupled to work together well, and that it does come at a cost, just as sandboxing does. I respect developers who do not package anything else. When I need a flatpak, I install it. Finally, it is also amazing that we have AppImages. Some tools just work perfectly well or well enough with limited integration capabilities in multiple diverse ecosystems. Why does everything have to be installable? So, if I want to use a tool I will get it however the developer decided to distribute it, trust that they have a good reason to do it the way they do it, and if I open my mouth it will be to say thanks, instead of being lame about someone's way of putting an effort for me to get a great product without asking for anything in return not being what I think most convenient. For me.

I agree. It reads like a cook book rather than a dictionary of tech specs. No spam getting in in the way of getting things running and getting things right; If you need details you can go to individual package docs from maintainers and project docs from devs, no need for misaligned redundancy. It is also pretty comprehensive, or at least I have not missed anything yet. And up to date. So, in my opinion, the best distro documentation I know of. And I like their community process too: The most trustworthy and reliable I have seen so far without a big corporation backing it up, except for maybe Debian. Let's keep the donations going, these good people deserve it!

Good article describing a boilerplate framework & techniques for (web) backend systems architecture implemented with off-the-shelf components. But like every systems architect I have ever met, it does not even put a thought into security or data governance (a priori).

I like the approach taken by several authors from Asimov in "The End of Eternity" to Star Trek or Loki on TV: Time travel is not allowed except for entities that live outside of time in a way that is not meaningfully perceived by anyone else; When unsanctioned travel happens, it is easy to detect and retroactively suppress by these entities. Of course this can all be refuted or at least declared a transient state at most by the mess Time Cop is; Or how things end up in any of the other stories.

F9 produces such a consistently and ridiculously good, cool, fun, and educational *social media content*; that it is installed permanently as a cognitive dissonance in the back of my mind.

Why are they so bad? They want you to keep using them, so they have to be bad enough.

Why hasn't anybody made a good one? Maybe they have, but they are not around for long. It is not a good business: Little growth potential, no recurring revenue.

I wouldn't ask this question to other people. Not about a specific company. I would look for core values and culture that align with mine, and the kind of impact I can have or the position sets me up for. Large renowned companies look better on your CV; startups often assign you more significant tasks, so don't dismiss them lightly. Also when I say core values I do not mean the HR corporate propaganda that every company puts out. Listen to the interviewers, check out the actual product(s) or service(s) they put out: it's about what they do and how they do it, not what they say; if the interview is transparent enough, you'll get to know at least part of the team you are going to work with: use that opportunity to find out what they are really about. A company is a community: it is not politics, religion, gender, age, race, friendship or family; but the collective planning and execution of ideas and goals through means every person in the organization should support or at least feel comfortable with.

(same reason as almost every other I/O decision they make, apparently)

They dropped the jack because there was money to be made, selling airpods.