insertcredit

5 ms·

1.
by insertcredit 7y ago
I made a reasonable argument and backed it with referenced facts. Besides the downvotes I received, my main posts were flagged and are now invisible. On top of that, I get low quality comments that add nothing but dilution to the discussion
2.
by insertcredit 7y ago
Is this relevant to the discussion? Does it change anything of what I wrote and referenced? Why do you keep bringing it up?
3.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I've been all over the US, NYC is a dump of colossal proportions, a train wreck happening in (maybe not so) slow motion. I live in Europe and parts of Manhattan reminded me of the third world. Hype / reality distortion have a lot
4.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I defined crapware as something which dilutes the space of good libraries, offers nothing new and pretends to solve non-existing problems. I made my case.
5.
by insertcredit 8y ago
More misinformation here. Emacs Lisp is a Lisp-2. Emacs Lisp has lexical scope. When writing code in Emacs, Emacs Lisp for all intents and purposes can be seen as a subset of Common Lisp, not an entirely different language like you present
6.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I mentioned the problem Lem claims to solve and proved that there are existing solutions to that problem. I also put forth that Lem is inferior to Emacs/SLIME/Sly when writing Lisp which should be obvious to anyone with Emacs expe
7.
by insertcredit 8y ago
This post is full of misinformation. cl-lib.el is not discouraged, it's widely used by Emacs itself and pretty much every substantial Emacs Lisp library out there. What's discouraged is using an older version, cl.el, at runtime [1
8.
by insertcredit 8y ago
One persistent problem I see in the Common Lisp (love the language!) space is the wide availability of crapware that not only doesn't bring something new to the table but is actively damaging to the community since it's diluting t
9.
by insertcredit 8y ago
Immersion is the killer feature of VR, not standalone graphical fidelity. FOV, 6DOF tracking are far more important today than 4K per-eye resolution and 120 FPS. Moreover, foveated rendering will give us drastic graphical fidelity improveme
10.
by insertcredit 8y ago
Like you I think the Quest will change everything. I feel that it has to, at this point, for VR momentum to break through. Do you think Oculus will dominate the space in the coming decade? I can't help but be reminded of Sense/Net
11.
by insertcredit 8y ago
One fact that's seldom reported is that RTM's father, Robert H. Morris Sr, started working for the NSA in 1986, two years before RTM unleashed the worm. Food for thought maybe?
12.
by insertcredit 8y ago
First, it's Lisp not LISP. Using "LISP" immediately flags you as someone with a superficial (if at all there) understanding of the language. Second, unsubstantiated proclamations like "Overuse of them led to LISP code be
13.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I am not sure I would call cranelift "substantial" in terms of exposure/usage. From what I gather, it's not used at all for normal, everyday Javascript. I stand corrected though, every little bit helps. Here's hope
14.
by insertcredit 8y ago
Not bad but a little bit of a publicity stunt. A major source of vulnerabilities is (still) the Javascript engine and that's (still) written in C++. Even worse, as far as I know, Mozilla has no plans to rewrite even parts of Spidermonk
15.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I've spent enough time (not much) with urbit to write a Nock interpreter/compiler. There are aspects of it that rub me the wrong way such as the needless custom terminology and general esoteric nature that sometimes reads like an
16.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I've known you (from your posts at comp.lang.lisp) to be eager to present the facts as you see them and thorough in your argumentation. What is it about Urbit/Yarvin that merits this sort of post?
17.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I will copy my post again, here, to expose your strawman or unwillingness to stop deflecting: "One would ask himself how the BSDs manage to do it (no systemd), Android (no systemd), ChromeOS (no systemd), Solaris/Illumos (no syste
18.
by insertcredit 8y ago
This is disingenuous, systemd-journald is the default in every systemd-using distribution I am aware of. The philosophy of systemd is all about tight coupling and forcing its singular vision on end users. When that vision falls apart you ca
19.
by insertcredit 8y ago
You are using logical fallacies in your argument. First, not _everyone_ has adopted it (loaded language). Google, which controls the vast majority of Linux systems on the planet, has not. GNU has not. Others [1] have not. Second, the critiq
20.
by insertcredit 8y ago
"Closer in spirit" does not mean anything tangible in the real world, you are merely playing with words. Solaris SMF is vastly simpler than systemd and has a much narrower scope and focus. I don't recall mentioning bash scrip
21.
by insertcredit 8y ago
The fact that people keep repeating the "messy shell scripts" fallacy is proof of how effective systemd propaganda has been. The vast majority of Linux systems on the planet, which ship software made by Google, do not run systemd.
22.
by insertcredit 8y ago
One gets the impression that optionality is only theoretical. Same for separate binaries. The degree of coupling in the systemd architecture is enormous. So then, what purpose do separate binaries serve other than being able to (convenientl
23.
by insertcredit 8y ago
At least as far as Debian is concerned, you will find that the people with skin-in-the-game (administrators) were massively against systemd. The Devuan fork/split happened exactly because of that.
24.
by insertcredit 8y ago
One would ask himself how the BSDs manage to do it (no systemd), Android (no systemd), ChromeOS (no systemd), Solaris/Illumos (no systemd) ... Your arguments hold no merit whatsoever. The fact is that all the problems you describe have
25.
by insertcredit 8y ago
The complexity of Sysvinit is orders of magnitude less than that of systemd.
26.
by insertcredit 8y ago
Devuan is a Linux distribution that does not ship systemd by default. You are comparing apples and oranges.
27.
by insertcredit 8y ago
Fully agreed. There has been a race to the bottom regarding technical competence by various entities for various reasons. To me it seemed at the time that Redhat used dark-pattern-like behavior in order to push systemd, exploiting people&#x
28.
by insertcredit 8y ago
If you don't grasp bash after two decades of Linux experience, you should maybe question yourself as to why that is rather than blame bash. Maybe you never properly spent a few days fulltime trying to learn it? I'd take bash scrip
29.
by insertcredit 8y ago
Launchd is nowhere near as bad as systemd and doesn't suffer from the latter feature creep.
30.
by insertcredit 8y ago
I refuse to use systemd to this day. It's unbelievably complex and became established through political power play rather than any sort of merit. Which is without a doubt not what I expected to see in the Linux ecosystem.

More ›