forrestthewoods

> just so convenient

Is it? At this point I associate Docker with slow build times and later upon layers of abstraction to try and cache and make it not slow. But it’s a never ending battle.

I can’t run Isaac Lab on my work cloud VM because the system has glibc2.34 instead of 2.35. The only way to hack around this is to move everything into Docker. So now there’s a big huge convoluted build process just because I changed a line of code. It’s utterly miserable with no redeeming qualities.

Again none of this is Docker’s fault. But the fact that Linux is so incapable of running software that Docker needs to exist is damning.

For reference Docker is not popular on Windows because Windows can simply run software programs without requiring Docker.

Yet for some reason people think Linux is a good platform for developers. It is bewildering…

> there hasn't been much of an issue around it. I think most developers have come around to the idea that it increases game sales.

Cloud gaming is too small to be relevant in any way. That’s why it’s ignored.

One of my deeply unpopular opinions is that Docker only exists because Linux as a bad operating system that is incapable of deploying Docker. I have not once worked on a project where “we’ll solve this with Docker!” didn’t result in never ending Docker fixes and workarounds and hacks.

This is not a slight on Docker itself. It’s a slight on the conditions that induced Docker to exist.

One of the great selling points of one of my projects is “this is easy to run without needing Docker”.

Dams and hydro are renewable energy. But they sure ain’t “clean” energy.

> Learning git was difficult, and the more they learned the more they discovered they had more to learn, including the little things, obscure details and a plethora of paper-cuts. For them (again, I suspect they are a majority), the perspective of learning something else comes with the expectation of a similar daunting effort and steep cognitive reluctance.

You just blew my mind with this. This is shockingly profound.

> [Git/GitHub] achieved a local maxima around 2012, and has been holding the industry back since :(

I agree so hard. It’s inertia is too strong and we’ve stalled progress for a decade.

I really really wish Sapling could be used externally. It is by-and-large TheWay.

Centralized, virtual file system, all commits automatically on cloud, large binary files totally fine, Mercurial CLI. It’s fantastic. People who only use Git really don’t understand how much better things can be.

There's a dead comment asking about the use of the term "clean room". I'm not sure why. I am not entirely certain that deeply analyzing super detailed traces qualifies as "clean room".

yes and? someone sharing the details of an extremely popular project is super cool. comments like this will not encourage more people to share more cool things.

I'd be ecstatic if more people used AI to share more cool things they've done. that'd be awesome. more of this blog post please.

Strongly disagree with your sentiment.

> You don't know that they didn't read it!

If someone sends me AI slop to read then I am going to assume and behave as if they didn’t read it until proven otherwise.

It is the responsibility of the sender to proactively say “I read this and stand by it as at least mostly correct and reasonable”.

They are also free to say “AI slop have not yet proof read”. Then I have an informed choice.

If there is any cartel that deserves to be broken its legal search. May they die a miserable death.

You can outsource your work to AI. You can even outsource your thinking. But you can never ever outsource your understanding.

Yeah Git is super mediocre. But the hypothesis is that you could build something that doesn’t suck!

Yes it would require a global blob store across reps. That seems like a good design choice.

I don’t know what you mean by “ won't work for version control databases, assuming use of a distributed VCS.”