Whatever git's practical benefits over SVN and CVS back in the day (and I can go into the weeds as a user if someone wants that), git was the DVCS that took over from the centralized VCS's of that era.

There is nothing in jj, pijul, or Bram Cohen's thing that is anywhere near as dramatic a quality of life improvement as going from VCS to any DVCS. And dramatic improvement is what is needed to unseat git as the standard DVCS.

I mean, if you're not doing something so important[1] that it adds a letter to the acronym, it's probably not the next new thing in version control.

1: I originally wrote the word "novel" here. But it has to be big-- something like guaranteeing supply chain integrity. (No clue if a DVCS can even do that, but that's the level of capability that's needed for people to even consider switching from git to something else.)

Reminds me of the time I accidentally entered my bank PIN into my washing machine and hackers ran off with $500 of my money.

What puzzled me most was the time and energy put into the attack, all for the off chance of a successful attack. Security footage showed them removing my washing while I was at work and replacing it with one the hackers controlled. This "phishing machine"-- as I now call it-- was apparently fitted with some kind of LoraWAN device waiting for me to unwittingly enter my PIN to unlock. Something my washing machine never asked me to do before, btw, but I did it anyway (like an idiot).

I changed my bank PIN, but I still use the old PIN to run the phishing machine-- funny enough it's fully functional and in fact works better than the old one.

All said, the hackers probably lost $1000 on the deal. Police said this is a very common attack on washing machine buttons throughout the Southeast, so I'm wondering if part of our current economic stagnation is due hackers going into bankruptcy from this.

* dev team is a ghost town

* literal tons of boilerplate just to bootstrap single, empty container

* hasn't had a proper release[1] in ages.

Unless I'm completely misinterpreting you, I'd say this isn't a good look for the "largest repository by volume"

1: of water

You want consensus from non-experts for a plan to use 20 smart bombs.

Your opponent wants consensus for a plan to live-stream a demo of 1 smart bomb, and then use 19 dumb ones.

Your team has more expertise.

Your opponent's plan saves enough money to buy a better PR team than yours, and is still more cost effective than your plan.

Who wins?

If our cash system deems dollars with certain serial numbers worth only $0.80 because they have history in the illicit drug trade, that cash is no longer fungible.

How is that functionally different than a system where a dollar of essential goods suddenly becomes $1.20 across most sellers for a particular consumer due to reliable inferences from an digital dossier inaccessible to the user?

In both cases, consumer confidence suffers. The biggest difference I see is that there's a rabid contingent who correctly yell, "Don't fucking mess with that!" with regard to currency fungibility, and a bunch of people saying, "It's complicated," with regard to surveillance capitalism.

Edit: again, to be clear-- I'm talking about individually tailored prices insidiously affecting large numbers of consumers in a consolidated industry for essential goods.

Edit 2: I know surveillance capitalism isn't the same thing as making currency be non-fungible. I'm looking for insight on what the difference is in terms of consumer confidence and other economic impacts.

Edit 3: clarification to narrow my question. If you can't tell yet, I'm earnestly looking for knowledge from someone who studies economics.

E.g., suppose I'm grocery shopping online and get put in behavioral histogram bin #1. You're in bin #2 because of stuff like impulsive browsing habits and low battery. Your bin's price for chips is consequently x% more expensive than mine.

Now, suppose both of us get separate uber rides from the same location. Similar data bins end up with your low battery generating y% higher price for your Uber.

Seems to me enough consolidation and behavioral data-based pricing practically impedes the fungibility of currency. Because while you and I can still borrow and pay back the currency directly to each other with impunity, the literal price of goods and services we can buy with that currency will be different. I.e., if you buy me a sandwich on Monday and I pay you back with a sandwich on Tuesday, you're losing money.

Edit: for the steel man of what I'm saying, imagine most grocery and convenience stores have shifted away from static pricing to something like qr codes. Also, assume pricing based on personal data is rampant across industries for most basic private goods and services.

If your comment is an attempt to run the game directly in the HN comments, I'm going to guess "German" by the placement of your verb here. :)

I get what the author is saying here. But it's a bad idea to treat one's work team with deep communal devotion in this way, as if they are a kind of dysfunctional family-- or, in the author's case, apparently higher in status than real family.

Doing this without proper remuneration creates a market distortion, and that is bad for capitalism.

Go find the last major Swiss route that was built, and compare its land acquisition difficulties to what happened with the California project. I'll rankly speculate that difference will be the meat of your answer.

You're not going to succeed at steps #6 and #7 in situations as dire as what the author describes without practicing a bunch. You have to choose low stakes, real situations to gain experience:

* a cashier asks you if you want to round up by donating to charity

* a friend asks if you want to do an activity with them, and you do not want to do that activity with them

* someone suggests splitting the check down the middle, but you only had a tiny side salad

* etc.

You can of course handle these however you want. But if you want to learn to set a line when it's important, you should have already practiced in a dozen or so cases like this, without apologizing: No, thank you / No, I'm not into that / I'm leaving enough to pay for my tiny side salad plus a nice tip

Practice doesn't guarantee you won't buckle in tough situations. But you'll definitely buckle if you don't.

Then it doesn't matter how many baroque shell companies it takes represent the thing internally. Either the thing can output a response in Care Home Object Notation, or it's just a bunch of crafty bullshit disguised as a care home.

You'd just walk in with your one-page CHOM spec and read down the sheet: "Number 1: Can I speak to a full-time nurse, please?" If they respond, "No, but here's two high-school interns in a trench coat," you can just be like, "Not a care home. Got it," and move on to the next one.

Given a large enough amount of data/pain, designing/optimizing to attack specific, known pain points always beats trying to solving a more general problem elegantly. I mean, kudos to whoever decided Zoom clients with shoddy connections should buffer then race back to realtime at 1.x - 2x speed (can't remember exactly how fast it goes-- perhaps it's dynamic?). One could come up with 1000 toy examples of where that breaks (music lesson, drama class, etc.), or just implement it and save a gazillion people gazillion hours of repeating themselves in boring meetings.

Edit: clarification

Would love to know the social media you've been consuming that could make you believe that an American in Paris who is praising French city planning for its positive health effects could possibly believe anything close to that epithet uttered by the current American president.

Of headlines? Always. Of the content of the article? Not without you providing counterevidence.

Speaking of the content:

* BYD has seen an uptick in demand for EVs

* "At one [BYD] dealership in Manila, the capital of the Philippines, demand is so high that it booked a month’s worth of orders in just the past two weeks"

* another dealership nearby had to hire more salespeople

* small uptick from Edmunds for people researching EVs in relevant period[1]

1: https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electrified-vehicle-researc...

Neither one of these dudes is wearing cotton base layers, midlayers, socks, etc. It's too slow to evaporate moisture which can cause blisters on feet and rapid drop of body temperature drop in cool/cold weather.

> The data proves that the gear of the past is capable, but it has a narrower operating window. If you stop moving in Mallory’s kit at 8,000 meters, you will freeze quickly. Modern gear buys you a safety margin if you become static.