memling

> When has ASN.1 ever broken backwards compatibility? I've never heard of an ASN.1 backwards incompatibility. Maybe, if you stretch an interpretation of ASN.1 in 1984 to allow new fields to be added to `SEQUENCE { }` then the later addition of extensibility markers could count as a very weak backwards-incompatible change -- weak in that existing specs that use ASN.1 had to add those markers to `SEQUENCE { }`s that were actually intended to be extensible, but no running code was actually broken. I would be shocked if the ITU-T broke backwards compat for running code.

Good question. I was thinking of the transitions in the '80s, although my experience with standards written during that time is very limited.

But yes, one of the reasons people use ASN.1 is because of its hard and fast commitments to backwards compatibility.

> Does one pay for an SLA for every piece of hardware, firmware, and software? The codecs are the least likely cause of downtime.

I don't recall saying that—just that I have had clients for whom the support was sufficiently important (because of their own reliability concerns) that they went commercial instead of open source. (They required, among other things, 24x7 support and dedicated resources to fix bugs when found; they also sought guarantees on turn-around time.)

> Why would you need a support SLA for ASN.1 and not for PB/FB? That makes no sense. And there's plenty of open source ASN.1 tooling now -- just look around this thread!

If your business depends on five nines plus of reliability in your 5g communications stack, you might be willing to fork over the price for it. Or if you need a bug fix made in a timely fashion to the compiker or runtime, likewise. As I've noted above, a client of mine moved to a commercial suite of tools for this reason.

Protobuf and flatbuffers have different use cases in my experience, although that's somewhat limited. Protobuf at least also introduced breaking changes between versions 2 and 3. ASN.1 isn't perfect in this regard, but these days incompatibikities have to go through ISO or ITU, etc.

Your experience may be different of course. I'm just pointing out that there are reasons people will opt for a commercial product.

> Meh. After all, if you're not using ASN.1 you're using something like ProtocolBuffers or FlatBuffers or whatever and all open source tooling.

Oh sure--there are plenty of alternatives to ASN.1. My guess is that most people who have the choice don't use ASN.1 precisely because open-source alternatives exist and can feasibly work for most use cases.

But if you happen to have one of the use cases that require ASN.1, open sourced tooling can be problematic precisely because of the need for a robust SLA.

> In the ASN.1 space everyone hopes that someone can dethrone OSS Nokalva's proprietary solutions

You're buying more than a compiler and runtime, though: you're also getting an SLA and a stricter guarantee about interoperability and bugs and so forth. I have no idea how good their support is (maybe it's atrocious?), but these are important. I had a client who relied on the open-sourced asn1c once who complained about some of the bugs they found in it; they got pushed into buying commercial when the cost-benefit outweighed the software licensing issues.

I second this: don't go down the wrong entrance, but definitely do visit. It's a fun time with knowledgeable employees that will take you on a tour. You can also see some of the machinery used to crack Japanese codes and some historical attempts at codes and code-breaking. It's a fascinating place.

> I think this plays a huge part as well. My wife and I were watching an episode of the US cop show “The Rookie” and they casually discussed paying a ticket for driving SEVENTY MILES OVER THE SPEED LIMIT. I went and checked and in LA the cost is about $500. This blew my mind.

This is mind-blowing, but it would be surprising to find this would happen without additional consequences. A friend of mine was ticketed for 20 MPH over the speed limit (not in California) and had his license suspended. Most states in the US adopt a points-based system that triggers suspension when you acquire sufficient numbers. California is no different.

> Notice how even if you are an early bird and in the office by 9, you are a lazy slacker when you leave at 5? Then someone rolls in at 11 and leaves at 7 - same number of hours. HARD WORKER.

So I generally agree with your post, but is this what constitutes early riser these days? I get having kids and missing the key 7-9am time slot, but is an 11am start time a Usual Thing?

> Also related to the ending, I‘ve come to realise more and more that most people reason out of belief first and arguments second on a lot of things (maybe most things?)

This is the thesis to the introduction to Jonathan Haidt's The Righteous Mind. Boiling it down, he argues that self-justification is the most fundamental human reaction. We reason after, not before, and our reasoning flows to align with our own justification.

(Luther would be proud.)

I was under the impression that this is why hydrogen tanks have special liners and are made of composites?

I heard Shoemaker or Levy once talk about the modem on Voyager...running at a blistering 10 bps. I keep our old 2400 bps modem around as a curio. The memories are interesting and fun for me, but I get that they may not be so much for some of the other engineers I work with.

> Is it an in-built preference? I think a robust monism is still a fairly radical position, especially among religious views. For example even the branches of Christianity which tack more materially tend to draw a rigid boundary between creator/created, God/the universe, etc. (and if you interrogate lay views they tend to skew even more dualistically).

Can you expand on this a bit? I have an intuition about what you're saying, but I confess that the definitions can be a little slippery.

TIL! Thanks a bunch, I'll definitely check this out.

One of the (maybe few) niceties of MS Office these days is that you can search through a list of most available commands through a simple Alt+Q and typing. This greatly improved my productivity for some common tasks, and it's the sort of discoverability that'd be helpful to make LibreOffice easier to use.

For my part, though, I'm typically authoring print documents in LyX, since I don't have to exchange documents routinely. If I do have to share Word-compatible documents, I'll sometimes use LO Writer or else convert from a text format to .docx using pandoc.