oarsinsync

> It typically required more direct sources of trust. If you were a grocery store, you might let customers you personally knew to be good for it, run up a 'tab' and settle on payday. If you were a bank, you might only lend to rich high-class people.

You hit the nail on the head with the first statement. It required humans in the loop. It scaled linearly. Local branch managers had relationships with the people in their community, and knew who could and couldn't be trusted.

It was an imperfect system, where a human could be prejudiced against another human, and deny them access to credit.

Sometimes that would get discovered, and the human was held accountable for their actions, or had their actions upheld by a (org-chart-superior) human.

Similar to the imperfect system today, where the models a computer uses could be prejudiced against a human, and deny them access to credit. Dissimilar in that the model or the computer is rarely, if ever, held to account. "Computer says no" is a meme for a reason.

> I mean that's pretty much the IndyCar spec ... but none since Mansell have really came over and dominated, not even Alonso.

Didn't Alonso's first attempt at the Indy 500 (with McLaren?) result in him making it into the final qualification category, and see him leading the race until his car blew up, forcing him to retire? On his first attempt?

> It's the release month, so 26.04 is April 2026. 26.10 lands in October.

26.04 is an LTS release, 26.10 will not be.

> > It's not the weed wacker's fault or even the dog's fault when someone got hurt, it's the fault of the guy who put a weed wacker on a dog and let it run wild.

> The difference is volume. They spent hundreds of billions of tokens on these agents. If you put "a million weed whackers on dog backs" you would see the difference.

So put one weed whacker on one dog, you're to blame. Put a million weed whackers on a million dogs backs and ... you're still to blame? Arguably even more so?

You provide a DTLS to clear-text proxy service, for applications where the client supports DTLS, but the server does not (or vice versa)?

Yeah, why did you build this? It's unclear what the value proposition is, paying for a MitM proxy. It effectively means it cannot be used with secrets, without trusting y'all to not be snooping?

100% easily scriptable. Just like running an (S)FTP server is easy, and Dropbox is not at all disruptive.

Except you're overestimating the barrier to entry of scripting for the overwhelming majority of people. OpenClaw is not disruptive because it does something that wasn't possible before, it's disruptive because it enables more people to do the thing that was limited to fewer people.

Where I get confused is why my techie friends are all going bananas over claws... they all know how to script already, and are crying about burning through multiple $200 claude subscriptions a month, filtering email. This I can't understand.

That was an eye openingly delightful read. Thank you for the recommendation!

There's something about circles of control in this, that makes the difference. If I publish information about myself, that's about me, and it's in my control.

If someone else shares information about me, without my consent, and someone uses that to nose in on me, that feels creepy and problematic.

I'm assuming you're alluding to them selling a managed solution, alongside the unmanaged solution that the GP is referring to?

The app looks cool, and the website design (tmux style pane at the bottom) is very clever. Nicely done. Will be giving this a try!

Been using Blink.sh with mosh, and the persistence of session is a joy, but the interface is still.. awkward at times.

Indeed. They forked Xbox Media Center back in the day, to produce a Mac version when none existed.

Then they became a client/server model.

They are supposed to provide the source code for Plex Transcoder, since that's a modified ffmpeg build. In practice, the version they share is not up to date with the version they ship.

They are generally speaking, closed source.

Infuse is another $100 license to sync watch history, when I already paid $100 for Plex a while ago (with the primary driver being 'sync watch history', which is the basic feature Plex provides).

Paying more money to use a different product, and then expecting all of my users to do the same, is a big hill to climb.

So the Plex inertia remains.