Debian has the advantage of not using snapd like Ubuntu does. You have to not only remove snaps but also instruct the package manager not you pull in snaps as dependencies and not to favor snap packages.

I have fond memories of Ubuntu being my first distro many years ago but pushing snaps onto users to compete with flatpak is a nuisance.

At work, we started the c++ migration to rust doing the following:

1. Identify "subsystems" in the c++ code base
2. Identify the ingress/egress data flows into this subsystem
3. Replace those ingress/engress interfaces with grpc for data/event sharing (we have yet to profile the performance impact of passing an object over grpc, do work on it, then pass it back)
4. Start a rewrite of the subsystem. from c++ to rust
5. Swap out the two subsystems and reattach at the grpc interfaces
6. Profit in that now our code is memory safe AND decoupled

The challenge here is identifying the subsystems. If the codebase didn't have distinct boundaries for subsystems, rewrite becomes much more difficult

code is just text, so code editors are text editors.

What sets IDEs apart are their features, like debugger integrations, refactoring assists, etc.

I love command line ± Vim and used solely it for a large portion of my career but that was back when you had a few big enterprise languages (C/C++, Java).

With micro services being language agnostic, I find I use a larger variety of languages. And configuring and remembering an environment for rust, go, c, python etc. is just too much mental overhead. Hard to beat JetBrain's IDEs; now-a-days I bring my Vim navigation key bindings to my IDE instead of my IDE features to Vim. And I pay a company to work out the IDE features.

for the record, I am in the boat of, use whatever brings you the greatest joy/productivity.

There is a very effective approach (34:00), that big companies like cloudflare use, to ship a product in a fast and quality way. It bears parallels to what you are describing. In essence engineers should not get hung up in the details to trying to solve everything.

1. Just build a proof of concept
2. Discard the prototype no matter what and start from scratch keeping the initial feedback in mind
3. Build something internally that you yourself will use
4. Only once something is good enough and is used internally, then release it to beta.

So that tedious process in trying to flush out all the details before seeing a product (or open source effort) working end to end, might be premature before having the full picture.

reminds me of the John Oliver episode on Data Brokers where he started buying up data on senators in an effort to get better regulations about tracking data and aggregation bc that seems to be the only way they want to pass bills. Their interests > interests of the people they should be representing

7 years ago when I started my career, My first project we sat down and designed the program and interfaces.

Today, we implement features using best practices, never sitting down to design and end up accumulating technical debt that we don't have funds or time to go back and fix.

Time to market is proportional to time to obsoletence. We don't design for longevity anymore :(

.... wow. amazing.

next time you post something as cool as this, write some body for the post. I saw it earlier when you posted but it had no body or other indication of what it is. I'm just hesitant to click on links but this is well worth it!

to preface what might sound like slander, I really would love to get my hands on apple hardware. It is engineered rather well and the geek in me can appreciate that. However, getting access to your own hardware is an issue.

While I have some concerns about their objective features, to my shame, the greatest problem is with the brand and their practices.

I think the root cause of all my issues stems from their morals and aggressive/elitist business practice - specifically their quest to squeeze money out of users and hide behind the lie of "we are doing this for the user's benefit".

I have no issue paying money for features I want or entities I'd like to support. In fact, I'm more inclined to financially support those who I believe in.

And apple loves to gatekeep features and keep them exclusive to apple. They effectively benefit from hard work of others who contribute to open standards and services, but at the same time do not share their own. Greedy.

I dont know to what capacity twitter uses cloudflare but cloudflare is rather ubiquitous. Even if twitter didn't have services with cloudflare, when a user's device resolves the domain name "twitter.com" to an IP address, it might go through Cloudflare's DNS servers. And givien the ubiquity of Cloudflare DNS, this is likely frequently. By monitoring the DNS queries for Twitter.com, Cloudflare can estimate the traffic volume by analyzing the number and frequency of requests received.

I don't know why cloudflare's CEO would do that or where he keeps his huge steel balls, but today I learned I can mine Cloudflare's internet usage data. And I might have found a new hobby!

Cloudflare Radar has an API that gives access to Cloudflare’s data on global Internet traffic..

Radar’s API is free, allowing academics, data sleuths and other web enthusiasts to investigate Internet usage across the globe.

let's try this again :D

@ChatGPT@lemmings.world why are these people notable figures in technology:

• Linus Torvalds
• Kent Beck
• Dylan Beattie
• Ian Cooper
• Simon Brown
• Martin Fowler
• Daniel Terhorst-North
• Sam Newman
• Andy Hunt

I don't know how I feel about defederating but I would like this instance to have a Terms of Use or Policy that prevents anyone who federates with us to use content on this instance for profit. Or something similar to spirit of Open Source licenses.

The link to mastadon's blog you posted is very informative. I encourage everyone who peeks in this post to read it.

I don't necessarily agree with Mastadon's official stance because say the largest Lemmy instance (Lemmy.world) was owned by Meta. Once enough users relied on content from Lemmy.world, Meta could then start charging other instances to federate with it if they want content. Which won't kill "the platform" but will make information inaccessible.

Mastadon's stance :

We have been advocating for interoperability between platforms for years. The biggest hurdle to users switching platforms when those platforms become exploitative is the lock-in of the social graph, the fact that switching platforms means abandoning everyone you know and who knows you. The fact that large platforms are adopting ActivityPub is not only validation of the movement towards decentralized social media, but a path forward for people locked into these platforms to switch to better providers. Which in turn, puts pressure on such platforms to provide better, less exploitative services. This is a clear victory for our cause, hopefully one of many to come.

However I'm confused how Mastadon's official stance reflects their devs and admins because one of Mastodon admin, kev, from fosstodon.org, has been contacted to take part in an off-the-record meeting with Meta. He refused politely and, most importantly, published the email to be transparent with its users. Thanks kev!

Mail from Meta to Kev, from fosstodon, and reply.

duckduckgo (who uses Microsoft's index I believe) is able to find Lemmy instances already.

problem is since every instance has its own domain you cannot search all of Lemmy or the more obscure fediverse. lemmy.world, beehaw.org, programming.dev are all different "websites".

I append "reddit" to my query when I want to search reddit for a human answer to a question. Can't do that with Lemmy, unless the instance is branded as Lemmy.

Unless there will be an org or volunteers that indexes federated instances and makes them available to search engines to they can be differentiated, finding stuff in the fediverse might be difficult...