P.S. I love sherlock holmes, and from that have some fascination of Victorian England, I just never thought we would go back to it. It was great if you were a noble and/or rich, but most of the populous wasn't either and suffered. All from my understanding, so historians or just more historically knowledgeable people can correct me.

On another note, I'm still trying to figure out the right balance in a home environment for direct hardware vs virtualization. I have taken classes, but they mostly talk about production environments. Many, don't even mention bare metal. I did read something on here recently, about minimal code and that was interesting. I've never been an expert, but I've enjoyed linux for quite a while. I wan't an early adopter but found it about 2008 and never went back. I never got used to snap/flatpacks/appimages but I know there is a place for them. My problem was that it made the old admin commands much less useful. 'mount' had too much mess. I know there is grep -v but you shouldn't have to do tons of that when trying to get an overview. top/htop are good but now there are tons of threads. So even when using tree view, it's harder to see. Not to mention, the ones I've tried, often lack features or features that don't work in the image form. I've studied lots of stuff, some at work, and some at home. I like to think I've forgotten more than some linux users ;P of course that doesn't apply to everyone. There have always been smarter people that know much much more. That's why I like to ask here. I really don't like videos as much; I prefer reading. Sometimes videos do help me but to me, they are much more time consuming, than reading and sometimes I watch half a vid before realizing it doesn't have what I was looking for. Right now, I need to study and use LLVMs a bit. I'm very late to that party. If nothing else, for searching the internet. Search engines just don't work well anymore. I have lots I want to do and work-on, if there was a large movement towards the microkernel, I definitely would want to move to that, but I just don't think it's there yet. Still, if time, I'll play with something. Redox, seemed to be full of great ideas, but I think it's stalled. When time, I'll try to look more at genode and I do appreciate the links. The trouble is, for me, I've read about many interesting projects that just never really come to fruition. I know resources is a huge problem. For years I've had the impression that unlike the olden days, where one programmer could change everything e.g. Linus, Stallman, and scores of others I don't know offhand. One person is no longer enough to change the world in this area, well with the exception of billionaires, like the guy behind Ubuntu. Even if your not a fan, it did change the landscape. Of course, the guy that did Redox, came really close, from my reading. If it was finished withing a few years, I think it would have. Maybe it still will. They list about a hundred developers. In contrast, I think the linux kernel has a couple thousand, but that's from a quick search. That's just the kernel, not a kernel, full OS with tools. Anyway, again, I appreciate it but for now, I need to work on some other stuff today :)

I know I didn't mention containers or VMs but again, not sure where the balance is, for me. I've thought about using Qube OS but I don't know where or if it's right for me. I tried IBMs VOID OS, and it was a pain for me. Again functionality and configuration. Not to be confused with Linux Void, which is really my favorite OS, but I'm not on it now because I have less time now than I did and it did still require more effort than Ubuntu or Mint. When I get time, I'll either go back to void, or do something else with my systems. Ubuntu is really kind of went to our way or the highway with the snap mess. Gentoo was also a great OS. I tend to really like Portage Systems, when they work. It can be a real pain, when they don't. Freebsd was good but never really desktop friendly. That might have changed but there where always issues with basic desktop programs when I used it, years ago e.g. LibreOffice and such. It seems to me, it was a case of devs not using it on the desktop. From the forum, the devs mainly used mac, and maybe freebsd on a server which it was perfect for, but the desktop ports seemed to be broken often.

Anyway, if your younger than I, am enjoy it and exploring. It is/was fun for me. I used to go to my states Linux Fest every year. I also used to get Linux Journal before it died. I miss that magazine ;)

From a user/fanboy/paranoid point of view, I don't like systemd. I've good development arguments for it's improved coding for usb device drivers. Still, when I have to reboot, because my system is frozen. It's more complex to use than say runit. Lastly, I'm nervous, that if a company took it over, it's the one piece that might help destroy most distros. Please no hate. This is only my personal point of view, as an amateur e.g. there are people on both sides that have a much better understanding of this.

Seems to favor the microkernel? I've been hoping we one day get daily driver micro-kernel distro. I asked about this but didn't get a lot of answers, except for those that mentioned projects that aren't there yet e.g. I would love to try Redox, but from my understanding, after 10yrs it's still not there yet.

It also brings me to a point that has confused me for years. As, an amateur how to I decide what is better for what level of virtualization from program images like appimage/flatpacks, containers, to VMs. So far, I've hated snaps/flatpacks because, they make a mess of other basic admin commands, and because there seems to be missing functionality. and/or configuration. It may be better now; I haven't tried in a while. Personally, I've enjoyed portage systems in the past, and they are so fast now (to compile). A lot of forums, forget that there are home enthusiast and basically talk about it from an enterprise perspective. Is there a good article or book that might explain when to choose what. Much of what I've read are just "how to" or "how it works". I guess, I would prefer someone who acknowledges we need something for the hardware to run on and when it makes more since to use a regular install vs an image (appimage/flatpack/snap).

Anyway, thanks so much for the article. I do believe you are right, a lot of companies just put out fires because none want to invest in the future. I mean even the CEO usually only is there a few years, historically comparatively; so why would they care? Also, I think H1-B is a security risk in and of itself because, at least in TX, most IT is Indian H1-B. I mean they want a better life, and don't have as many family ties here. If they were to "fall into" a large sum...they could live like Kings in India, or elsewhere.

I nothing so far has convinced me there are enough resources put into any project to make anyone of them a "daily driver" for a desktop/laptop or that there will be anytime soon.

I can't complain as it's more a wish and/or a hope. I really don't have the time, brains, or money to significantly contribute. It's just that I was trying to ask those that might have one or more of those, if it might be a good time for the "foss" community to seriously consider it, or if not why. So, I can understand better.

"performance hit taken when transitioning from the user processes to the microkernel" is this still a large issue from the point of view of a desktop/laptop i.e. less embedded or other low power systems?

I'm a middle aged +, amateur user/enthusiast. So, I'm really asking. Lastly, I wonder if the Linux kernel is like the Weasley house in Harry Potter i.e. kind of a monster with parts on top of parts , with the whole being more unruly and although functional is a bit of an unruly mess at this point that doesn't resemble anything like a good overall design like a good "new" house could be. Again, just asking. Most of this is well beyond my understanding.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43872220

Points: 3

# Comments: 14

"The delegation of discretionary power to make such orders is required to be supported by either an expressed or implied congressional law, or the constitution itself"

If something were to be de-funded, it should be done by the congress as that's where it was initially funded right?

It seems to me the our checks and balances are failing. The judicial branch, at least at the highest level, seems to be mostly supporting him, even when they don't have much or any constitutional ground to do so.

I have learned by listening. There are many people on both sides smarter than I am. But if they don't listen and discuss, then they are stuck and won't grow in any way. Usually, there are valid points on both sides but you made none.

I had this concept myself as I've always thought c-suit executives are mostly interested in there own interest and that it's exacerbated by them not staying long term. I don't know the stats, but CEO's used to be there for 10-30 years but now many are there for a very short time like 5 or less. Again, those numbers are pulled out of "you know where" but I have read that its much less than it used to be. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong. Of course, most of us know that politicians don't really represent the populous anymore. There was a Princeton study on that that gets quoted allot and I've found a copy of it, but it's no longer easy to find. I would be interested in why it's so hard to find. Also, I would be interested if there are more studies like that.

Other Person:

FDA:

Q: How is the expiration date determined for an at-home COVID-19 diagnostic test and can it be extended? A: All at-home OTC COVID-19 diagnostic tests are labeled with an expiration date printed on the outer box or package. Generally, tests should not be used beyond this expiration date. However, as discussed here, these expiration dates can be extended beyond the date printed on the outer box or package as additional stability data is collected.

COVID-19 test manufacturers perform studies to show how long after manufacturing COVID-19 tests perform as accurately as the day the test was manufactured. The shelf-life is how long the test should perform as expected and is measured from the date the test was manufactured. The expiration date is set at the end of the shelf-life and is the date through which the test is expected to perform as accurately as when manufactured.

The testing to determine this time period is called stability testing because it is confirming the time period over which the performance is expected to remain stable. There are different types of stability testing. The most accurate is real-time stability testing, where the manufacturer stores the tests for the time period of the proposed shelf-life (plus a little extra time to ensure the expiration date can be relied upon) and then evaluates its ability to perform accurately. For example, for a proposed 12-month shelf-life, the manufacturer would evaluate the performance after storing the test for 13 months.

In some cases, accelerated testing provides a faster way to estimate the stability of a test's performance over time by storing the test for a shorter time at a higher temperature, and then evaluating its ability to perform accurately. However, since accelerated testing only estimates the test stability, it does not provide as much assurance as real-time data, especially for longer time periods. Based on experience with tests and stability testing, accelerated testing typically provides sufficient assurance to label tests with a shelf-life of up to six months.

Since it takes time for test manufacturers to perform stability testing, the FDA typically authorizes at-home COVID-19 tests with a shelf-life of about four to six months from the day the test was manufactured, based on initial study results, and it may be extended later as additional data is collected.

Once the test manufacturer has more stability testing results, such as 12 or 18 months, the test manufacturer can contact the FDA to request that the FDA authorize a longer shelf-life. When a longer shelf-life is authorized, the expiration dates will be extended and the test manufacturer may send a notice to customers to provide the new authorized expiration dates, so the customers know how long they can use the tests they already have. If you did not purchase your at-home COVID-19 diagnostic test directly from the test manufacturer, you may not receive such a notice.

You can check the Expiration Date column of the List of Authorized At-Home OTC COVID-19 Diagnostic Tests to see if the expiration date for your at-home OTC COVID-19 test has been extended and how to find any new expiration date.

Q. Can I use an FDA-authorized at-home COVID-19 diagnostic test that is expired? A: The expiration date for an at-home COVID-19 diagnostic test may be extended beyond the date printed on the outer box or package as additional stability data is collected. You can check the Expiration Date column of the List of Authorized At-Home OTC COVID-19 Diagnostic Tests to see if the expiration date for your at-home OTC COVID-19 test has been extended and how to find any new expiration date.

Me:

That's a lot of good information. Thank You.

It does seem to confirm that the test I received have spent most of their useful life in storage with only a fraction remaining. From what your saying my guesstimate of manufacturing date was close. To update it with your information, if I'm correct that means they were manufactured between July 17 2023 and Sep 17 2023 and I received them yesterday Oct 3 2024.

So they are good for 16 to 18 months from the date of manufacture. They are in the hands of the "end user" for their remaining 3 months (the extended expiration). That means they were stored i.e.unusable for at least 80% of their useful life (about 81 to 83%), if I did that correctly.

Am I correct or?

It seems like the program needs work, otherwise a lot of money and material is wasted without being able to be useful. Ideally, the test should be usable for much more of their lifespan right?

Other Person:

But they may extend it again, still they can't know how long it's good for until it isn't.

Me:

Is it normal to extend multiple times? That's news to me. I would really appreciate it, if it was 6 more months or more. Partially, I just hate throwing unused stuff away.

It still seems like the 60 day guarantee is a little low, especially given your information. If mine are normal/average, then most should be good at least a year, if not one and a half plus. So the guarantee is still a very small percentage of useful life.

Other Person:

Some of the older ones were extended up to another 12-15 months (over multiple extensions). They just can't say how long it will last until it stops working, so another extension is possible or even likely depending on how good these are. You do have options if they don't extend it to keep from throwing it away unused. You could use it. Lol

__________________________________________ end of thread

I didn't get to respond as the post was removed but I did message her and thank her for all the good information. I do hope I don't use them all because I normally am not sick that many times a year. I received all 4 but I do live alone. So if I use them all, I will have had a very bad couple of months.

Still, maybe I'll be lucky and they extend them again. I also don't know the normal or average only my experience. I only believe that it may be more common because of the very short 60 day guarantee. It would be nice to hear otherwise. I just hope that most test don't sit unusable warehoused for 80% plus of their lifespan. Of course, I don't know, hence the questions.