gcarvalho

What does AWS get out of this? Couldn't they build their own offering on top of DuckDB, just like MotherDuck has been doing?

Buying the team and having them all quit is such a bad outcome for AWS, especially they would not keep any of the IP, which is owned by the DuckDB Foundation. I don't think they would be that short-sighted.

I don't mean to be dismissive of the work done by the team which just resigned, and hope they get back on their feet.

But also out of those 6y the core team did not exist for ~5y, apparently. How is it a highly ignorant reaction?

To be fair, if I submit changes and don’t notice I added .vscode / .idea / my_notes.txt / .DS_Store / .swp then it was a sloppy job and I shouldn’t expect the project to adapt to ignore every possible garbage file so that I can continue carelessly “git add .”-ing

I assume that’s why some open source maintainers don’t bother either - if you haven’t even looked at your diff before submitting then why should they?

I do the same sometimes, but a one-off clone is not quite the same as maintaining a "local remote" and pushing refs to it.

> it's positioning itself as a drop-in replacement for SQLite

While SQLite is often used for comparison (“SQLite for OLAP”), I’ve never seen DuckDB market itself as a “drop-in” replacement. Where did you see that?

> my guess is that someone at their previous work place had reasoned that forcing periods encouraged developers to actually write meaningful sentences

I have actually seen proper capitalization and correct conventional-commit types to correlate very well with the author being intentional and the patch being of good quality.

e.g.

- (a) chore: update some_module to include new_func

- (b) feat: Add new_func to handle XYZ case

Where:

(a) is not a chore, as it changes functionality, is uncapitalized and is so low-signal I can probably write a 10 line script to reliably generate similar titles.

(b) is using the correct "feat" commit type, capitalized and describe what this is for. I expect the body to explain "why", as well, and not to reiterate the "how" in natural language.

This is just my experience, but I've seen commit messages where people actually put in some effort to usually come with a good patch, and vice-versa.

I was never very good on FPS games, but during pandemics I would play often with friends.

One day I pop up a practice map in cs:go where one of the challenges is shooting a fixed target after it turns green. If you don’t do it within 250ms or something (nothing crazy in terms of human reaction time), then you don’t score.

I was flabbergasted to see myself miss every single time. My friend even told me “dude, are you pretending? How are you so slow?”

So the next day I got a new mouse and what do you know, I’m actually responding in time, and scored most of the time when the rectangle went green. Just the mouse was not registering it fast enough.

Of course, that didn’t translate into such a huge boost in actual gameplay, but it’s impressive how that made me consistently miss. Likely it had some crazy 50ms+ lag.

> Only at small scales are full stack engineers valuable.

Seems like the ideal career is to start somewhere big and successful enough that allows you to specialize (after some poor generalists sabotaged their own careers by making it a thriving environment for specialists). Because even small scale businesses think they should start by hiring specialists.

Looking forward to upgrade over the weekend.

Have had my RPi on Debian since Debian 9, with smooth upgrades every time.

I have recently migrated ~8y of Apple Numbers spreadsheets (an annoyingly non-portable format) to plaintext accounting.

It took me many hours and a few backtracks to get to a point where I am satisfied with it, and where errors are caught early. I would just suggest anyone starting now to enable --strict --pedantic on ledger-cli from the day 1, and writing asserts for your accounts as well e.g. to check that closed accounts don’t get new entries.

I really miss data entry being easier and not as prone to free-form text editing errors (most common are typos on the amount or copying the wrong source/dest account), but I am confident it matches reality much better than my spreadsheets did.

I'm not sure that's what you're implying, but DNS-level blocking is not more powerful than filtering in the browser, at least in the sense of what it is capable of.

Content-filtering can and most definitely does block domains entirely, but it can also filter page elements served from the same domain which match a known ad "signature".

Though, if you can't run an adblocker, e.g. your Smart TV's browser then sure, DNS-level blocking is your best bet.

I’m not saying this is good security hygiene, but not necessarily everyone with access to the file will also have access to the password in the email.

e.g. someone downloaded the password protected zip on a public computer, logged out of their email, but forgot to delete the file.