seorphates

This is nothing but absolute bullshit. That's not how a network works and you know it.

-- sorry, sorry, impetuous. I'm simply tired of the bandwidth apologists. Data caps are 100% theft of service.

sudo reboot

You should learn vim if you want to deal with systems. You can learn vim or not if you don't.

lookback: vi, sh and unix have become your vim, bash and linux systems of today. Now, while they have forward compatibility, of sorts, vi and sh, the same cannot be said in reverse, as a rule. Modern bash folks have bent bourne shell syntax into foreign looking contortions where bourne shell syntax is a) performant and conformant, b)a lot simpler when simpler is better and c) is why bash maintains posix.

I agree, learn basic vim. And bash. But not really to program with. It's more of a burden than not for a million languages and formats.

I can appreciate the quip, especially given my curmundgeonly entry. But the point remains. The shell needs to be able to call any command on the system reliably. Even aged old counting methods. At no point in that loop would the expr subprocess return other than zero. Try to break out of that loop with that bash switch.

One should not rely on these magics, the ones that alter runtime behaviors, without truly understanding what you're after and what you're writing. Or mostly understand. They're fine and good if you have narrow routines with a very strict focus - "I'm in, I'm out, bang."

The best switches available to the shell without a bunch of feature and package and library this or that bloat are exactly

  -x
  -n

That's all that you need to ensure that your scripting is what you need it to be. Introduce the magic after you've written the thing. When it's ready and it passes your tests then test it again.

Every single utility and package on that system is at your fingertips. Demand accuracy. I do.

Ok, "garbage" may have been harsh but how about a fun example? Try this with and without -e

  #!/usr/bin/env bash

  bell=`tput bel`
  tock='Blastoff!'

  do_ring()
  {
    if [ "$1" ]; then # true
      echo -n $bell; sleep 0.1
      echo -n $bell; sleep 0.1
      echo -n $bell; sleep 0.1
      echo $tock
    else
      echo -n $bell; sleep 0.1
    fi
  }

  i=3
  while [ "$i" -ge "0" ];
  do
    if [ $i = 0 ]; then
      sleep 0.5
      echo ok
    else
      echo $i $bell
      sleep 0.5
    fi
    i=`expr $i - 1`
  done

  do_ring $1 # do something different if arg
  sleep 1
  echo neat.
  

Semantic qualities aside there is something here that breaks with -e and if you're used to using -e by default you might be baffled and think shell sucks, for example.

Not to be that guy but this is mostly garbage. I suggest simply paying attention and testing. Switches can be a useful part of the tool but they can break things. It doesn't make things better rather it alters behaviors of the shell in sometimes unintended ways. Try some loops with some -eo. If you have a pipe that fails your script you're just ripping the heart and potential out of your script. I think you might just be looking for one-liners. It can be good to catch your failures and try other things vs "woop, damn, nope." Maybe you need things to fail first.

"Quote liberally" - also ripe. Mind your aPostrophes and Quotes because they do things.

I like writing for me and what I need done, not what or how others might have me write or how others might think it should be done.

The shell is a base orchestration and interface tool for your os. If you think it's just that bad then just stick to your language of choice but please refrain from suggesting lazy habits make a better shell, they don't.

Fly your own kite. It's much more fun.

I found it distasteful to even click it and I definitely can't stomach a full read.

It's extraordinary to me how we so willingly accept policy that directly and negatively affects so, so many facets of society and economy.

You want to maintain all the effects of growth, profits and budgets of a drug war economy? If so then you're a fucking idiot.

Sorry, I got a little discombobulated with your life in macos is better than unix/linux comment, but only because macos is unix. Thus life is better because macos is unix - unix with an excellent window treatment, no less.

But the trolling is a serious problem and more effort needs to go into addressing it directly. This is the stuff that righteous idiots grab a hold of - it's basically an iron buoy thrown to people that can't swim.

To top poster: these two things are not the same. They are wholly different classes where at the very base level one cannot exist without the other, literally. One is a utility provisioning and the other an appliance, figuratively.

This actually feels more like what I would expect police work to be like given the situation.

They most certainly do not have cause to demand access to swaths of comms no matter whose comms they're after and most assuredly when that access actually entails enabling access to all of the comms.

I posit there is no authority that should be able to demand this as a matter of the right to human existence. Law, order, society and government should not have ultimate authority on private communications no matter what the tech is capable of. We, as humans in a modern world, can speak and if desired do so in private. This is our right as individuals and if encryption helps us accomplish and enforce that right then so be it.

If they have probable cause then they need to beat feet or beat heads but either way they need to get to work. And by work I do not mean trying to impose a different reality than the one that we currently have - where math is fact, compute is cheap and source is open.

What's it going to be? 100 go free or six lines from everyone?

Right, for the masses, but for focused enterprise, like a well resourced gang, for instance, refortifying your security is just another build away. Add on some sneakernet transport and side-load instructions and the only people affected by a weakened platform is everyone else.

Is it? You kind of lost me. Isn't the actual issue math?

I can appreciate hn is mostly humor intolerant but these are all basically right on point. The web experience is now akin to walking the mall; loud, expensive, garbage.

I might go so far as to say that our potential for a publicly operated social network is already here, or right close, but is being severely and intentionally hampered by ISPs more than anything or anyone else - and by extension recalcitrant, ignorant or paid-for representation.

Unrestricted symmetrical broadband would be a more than adequate foothold for robust frameworks that could fulfill the aspirations of one voice among billions in a truly decentralized fashion as well as provide a true springboard for thoughts, ideas and actions.

I believe the only role government should have here is ensuring access to the pipes that are regulated as an unhindered, affordable utility whose content is regulated only by you.

I also believe there are no words worth censoring. Yes, even nazi fucks. Let them speak and their words will prosper or fail on their own merit. We can't treat symptoms or causes if we drive unwanted words into darkness where they can fester and puss.

I suppose, yeah. Maybe that's a valid point in that until we can (want to?) cordon off core social services (for the whole of society) from the reach of private capital then we will inherently continue to create and sustain a market that zeroes in on the truly vulnerable. For example services just like healthcare including aging with dignity in assisted living after they've either been taxed out or need help or both.

For that latter part I've witnessed two mind-numbingly ugly siphoning of all assets to the tune of thousands and thousands of dollars a month until assets are gone and then they're forced out and into pretty sub-optimal situations and neither of these two examples started off anywhere near the edges of being poor but they certainly did die that way.