I haven't used a lot of different distros, but for me, Debian has been a good balance of those factors. You may need to do more upgrades per decade, but the ones that you do are more liable to go smoothly.

Just my 2¢ on the topic (:

Though perhaps more to your point, if some superhuman AI is developed, and understands things better than us without telling us about it (or being unable to), it could perform feats that seem magical to us — that would concern us even if we don't understand it, since it affects us.

But I think in the frame of reference of the commenter you were replying to, they're just saying that the low-level AI used in this specific case is not capable of making its results actually useful to us; humans are still needed to make it human-relevant. It told us where to find a gem underground, but we still had to be the ones to dig it out, cut it, polish it, etc.

Mercurial's "branch" was generally intended for long-lived things. Think the "stable branch" or a "version X" support branch for a project.

The branch name is baked into the commits that use it. You can hide them from the UI with "--close-branch", but they will still exist forever in the commit history. This is both a good thing and a bad thing, depending on your desires.

This is different from Git's "branch" which is basically just a pointer to a commit. It is not part of commit history, it is just a convenience for the developer. Later, Mercurial added "bookmarks" which are similar.

[1] https://repo.mercurial-scm.org/hg-stable/rev/d4ba4d51f85f

[2] https://wiki.mercurial-scm.org/CompatibilityRules

HN discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47603231

  [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_dimension
  [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox

I laugh (:

But good for you, whatever works. Personally, I can't do music with much lyrics or narrative; I find it distracting.

But to each their own!

The one in the article is the same essential technique (structurally speaking), but with a lot more decorative flourish.

  > there are billions of souls on this planet. They're not a rare thing
  > like say, gold. They're very easily produced, by two people getting it
  > on. That leads to a harsh conclusion: human beings aren't that valuable
  > as individuals. We are in fact very disposable and replaceable.

Lumps of gold are largely interchangeable. It's just a mass of gold atoms that we don't differentiate between, so one lump of gold is as good as another. But people are not like that. If you were to painstakingly transform a lump of gold into a beautiful sculpture, it would be worth more than its face value. And if a person transforms from the lump of flesh they are born as into a unique individual, they are worth something more, too. Two gold sculptures would not be interchangeable, to an art aficionado, and two people are not interchangeable in that way, either.

On the gross large scale, yes, we're all lumps of flesh squidging around on the planet; a uniform slimy patina on a tiny ball of dirt. And our various large-scale systems and policies (economic, political, etc) treat people in this way, too, in varying degrees.

But you are living your one and possibly only life (just like everyone else). And you have taken a unique path through that life (just like everyone else), and I'd just encourage you and/or others reading to cherish that, both in yourself and others, even if (or especially if) the systems in which we live don't seem to. It is something that can't be taken from you, because it is intrinsic to you, and that is a value beyond "what someone will pay for."

Just my 2¢

But using keyboard arrow keys work for me.

Then there are the people who program best in a fugue state and the idea of having to constantly break that to transform their thoughts into words and human interaction is anathema.

I say this as someone who just woke up in the wee hours of the morning when nobody else is around so I can get some work done (:

Some of the same problems. One nice thing about verifying content rather than using an SSL connection is that plain-old HTTP caching works again.

That aside, another benefit of less-centralized and more-fine-grained trust mechanisms would be that a person can decide, on a case-by-case basis what entities should be trusted/revoked/etc rather than these root CAs that entail huge swaths of the internet. Admittedly, most people would just use "whatever's the default," which would not behave that differently from what we have now. But it would open the door to more ergonomic fine-grained decision-making for those who wish to use it.

  [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47248319
  [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rutaceae
  [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citrus
  [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zanthoxylum

From the article:

  MetaPost is written in literate programming language WEB, then generating
  Pascal code from it. Hence the tooling and developer experience around
  it is quite suboptimal. Extending it is also almost impossible.

I see one instance on this page of a keyboard with double "B" key ("Alice layout"), but not the others.

I've been interested in trying a split keyboard, but I like to type those middle keys with either left or right hand depending on the moment, so all the split keyboards I've tried have ended up somewhat annoying, for that reason.

Or, perhaps just as good, have a way for it to dump out data as json, and could be consumed by some other send-the-email tool. There is the "-json" sqlite option, of course, but I'm not sure if your schema is meant to be stable.

I have a perl script for reminders like this that has been super handy over the 10+ years I've been using it. Never bit the bullet to put it in a nice UI or have a backing DB like this project, though.

So, "Rayleigh scattering" is the common term still used today, but there is a deeper reason for the formula being correct — it remains correct even when molecules are relatively close together, such as in the lower layers of our atmosphere.

I found this nice paper[1] giving an overview of the timeline, various discoveries, etc: http://users.df.uba.ar/bragas/Web%20roberto/Papers/sobelman%...

  Being able to abandon a project for months or years and then come back
  to it is really important to me (that’s how all my projects work!) ...

I, too, have found found that my interactions with past versions of myself across decades has been a nice way to learn good habits that also benefit me professionally.

At least that is my understanding; I'm not a lawyer or constitutional scholar :)