balsoft

and it means you GO BACK too, no one should give a fuck about which gen. you’re currently a part of.

This would mean that like 99.9% of Earth's population has to move somewhere. Almost all land was fought over endlessly and changed metaphorical hands multiple times over. What we call "indigenous people" in a territory is usually just whoever was winning those wars before written history began.

What "landback" actually means is recognizing the systemic racism that was and still is perpetuated against the indigenous people by means of taking away their ancestral lands, slaughtering and enslaving their ancestors, and destroying their way of life; and addressing that racism by giving jurisdiction and sovereignty over their lands back to them. It doesn't mean that everyone but the indigenous people have to move out; descendants of colonizers born there are technically natives of that land too. The difference is that they get systemic advantages from their ancestry whereas indigenous people get systemic discrimination. This is the thing that ought to be addressed. (well, the horrifying economic and governance system that the colonizers brought and festered must be addressed too, but all three are tightly coupled together)

In the case of Israel the difference is that a lot of colonizers are first gen, they are not natives, they do have somewhere to "go back to", and they are actively perpetuating colonization and genocide rather than simply getting an advantage from their ancestors doing so. In such cases it of course makes sense for the decolonization effort to focus on direct expulsion of invaders.

Yes, this is exactly what I'm advocating for.

I doubt people drive at 80 in a city

Yeah there are roads with 90 km/h speed limits within city borders. And people speed too. It's insane.

Although if you as a pedestrian ever try to cross a line of traffic going 60, it's also quite horrifying.

I believe the speed limit within cities should be 30 km/h by default, with very few exceptions. That puts people before cars, as it should be. And ideally we should strive to make public transit and bicycle infrastructure good enough to just ban personal vehicles in cities outright.

I say that as someone who owns a car and likes driving it. Cities and towns are just not the right place for cars. They belong on dirt country roads and off-road. Basically, if the population density allows us to build serious infrastructure for transportation, it doesn't make any practical sense to build infrastructure for personal motor vehicles.

Eh, honestly sometimes I stumble upon code which was last modified in the last millennium and it's usually fine. If has been working for 30 odd years then it stood the test of time and probably isn't too janky. Selection bias strikes again.

I mean, Anubis would do a pretty bad job in their case anyways, and their attitude kind of makes practical sense there. Almost all code fetching tools (from git to ftp to curl) don't run any external code (and I think we can agree it would be a horrible idea to do so); as such, proof-of-work solutions like Anubis won't work for code hosting (which is what the article is about).

But yeah I agree that in more human-oriented use-cases Anubis is great. Still, I can also see FSF's point that it's somewhat close to what an annoying proprietary system would do, even if I think it's a good compromise given the circumstances of the modern web.

It’s so fucking annoying having to deal with their puritanism

You in particular don't need to deal with them in any way at all. The code they host is free software and has plenty of other mirrors all over the web. If you want to contribute to any of the projects for which they are hosting upstreams you can almost always just send an email with your patch to authors directly. Save your anger for capitalists.

Can you elaborate a bit? The blog post is a tad overdramatic but doesn't seem to have anything particularly bad in it.

If you're trying to avoid a lot of those traps, shellcheck is pretty cool. I have written my fair share of bash and yet still get caught off-guard by its warnings - and it's right most of the time!

Honestly this made me really sad that we're stuck with this archaic, awful language as a primary way of programmatically interacting with our computers. And I don't mean to say anybody has done anything wrong here - sh and bash were revolutionary and amazing for their respective times, and maintainers who are keeping bash alive now are heroes who deserve praise. However, many decisions made when sh was originally developed turned out to be footguns, still creating bugs today (despite shellcheck et al).

nushell is somewhat promising but flawed (because it has to be built on the same system interfaces as sh, after all). The most annoying is that there's no facilities for setting any metadata on data streams (in particular there's no way to set the format of the data) so everything has to be marshalled manually, which would be OK for a proper programming language but really annoying for a shell. At least it fixes most of the quoting, escaping, interpolation, substition etc awfulness, and allows for manipulating data in a more structured way.

I really don't know if it's even possible to make a language that would be a good convenient shell and at the same time not prone to bugs which are easily noticeable in other languages. I hope that something like this becomes a reality at some point.

Bruh WTF, don't do that :/

Passing them as arguments can be even worse - depending on the configuration, process arguments of running processes can be seen by everything running on the machine.

Careful there. You are only a half dozen abstraction layers away from reinventing NixOS.

As for your question, the best way is to put it in a file that is then read by the chroot script and delete later.

Nah, they made the stabilization and image processing pipeline that good. I strongly dislike Apple products in general but have to give them credit where it's due.