I tried Tangled and tried to run my own Knot, the problem I had was I'd create a repository, have it get created correctly on my Knot, but then would never see any updates to the repo on Tangled itself.
The main issue is that even though I had the knot with IPv6 connectivity, it only really reliably worked once I enabled lots of IPv4 NAT'ing and also created a dummy A record for the Knot.
> I would much rather have an onboard AI that can discriminate between unarmed civilians and military assets,
Has this been proven to actually occur? There have been lots of reports that similar systems in Israel that use AI, struck hundreds of targets that were civilian. They did not discriminate.
I think that if you develop your application from scratch and directly use Redis as it was intended (data structures over the network) then it makes sense. I've done it for some applications and it's quite nice.
But you have to make the choice to skip using a relational database, and a lot of application frameworks make it very easy to use a relational database out of the box, to the point where you would have to make a conscious choice to use Redis directly, and sometimes for a CRUD app it's easier to just use the RDBMS.
I do agree with the feeling that Redis started to add more and more features as time went on. A lot of that is because the time and cost to stand up a dedicated service (like Kafka, RabbitMq, etc etc) was higher than just putting more data into Redis.
While I agree with the theme that Redis has become more and more complicated and had more features added to it, as part of a monetization push by Redis Inc, it's understandable.
Especially since there are plenty of other posts on HN titled "Just use Postgres" for everything. So, why does Postgres get a pass on being a message queue, distributed lock manager, JSON document store, and vector database, while Redis is not allowed to?
I have also moved my git repositories to a self-hosted NUC. I have not yet bothered with a HTTP frontend to share it with the world, mostly because I don't want to provide AI scrapers with content and don't want to put the work in to block them.
It's a shame that all these companies that benefited from open source have poisoned the industry like this
So, they implemented a git client in zig, that had some significant speedups for their usecase. However:
> The git CLI test suite consists of 21,329 individual assertions for various git subcommands (that way we can be certain ziggit does suffice as a drop-in replacement for git).
<snip>
> While we only got through part of the overall test suite, that's still the equivalent of a month's worth of straight developer work (again, without sleep or eating factored in).
I have been struggling with this, myself. I used to push everything to GitHub, but a couple months ago I switched over to using my small low-power home server as a Git host. I used to really enjoy the feeling of pushing commits up to GitHub, and that little dopamine rush hasn't really transferred to my home machine yet.
It's a shame. The people who control the money successfully committed enshittification against open source.
As someone who was impacted by GitHub's git outage in late February, which caused us to cancel a feature release, I am more sensitive to the availability of their git service, than their chatbot.
Jazzband maintained some incredible Django packages and tools that made it possible for me to build a system at my $JOB that would have been impossible to do on my own. It is a true tragedy of the commons situation where I was expected do more with less, and I didn't have the ability to contribute back/donate anywhere near the value that these projects provided to $JOB or myself. I did contribute personally, but it's very clear how all of this value has been extracted and used by large companies to build higher and higher walls for themselves, and none of the people that actually make any of this work get more than crumbs.
I think this reveals a great deal about the thinking of the ruling elites.
The K shaped recovery phenomenon demonstrated that the economy can continue to thrive, when consumption by the lowest earners is replaced and concentrated by earners at the top. This demonstrated to the elites that actually, we don't need as many consumers to grow the economy, and that it's possible to redistribute wealth upward without losing growth.
These public comments just show that the elites are more and more comfortable making it explicit that there are too many "useless eaters" in their opinion, and that the change has been from considering just the Third World to be where these "useless eaters" are while still preserving an imperial core, to now considering everyone that isn't them, regardless of First or Third world, to be a useless eater.
Very dangerous thinking, but at least it's out in the open now.
They want to capture the entire value of everyone's labor and hoard it for themselves, and discard the people that produced it.
That's a great question. I would also love to know that answer. I agree with you that they're not going to share the refund if the importer was the middleman in the supply chain, and same thing if the importer was also the seller.
https://coreitpro.com https://github.com/sc68cal
my public key: https://keybase.io/sc68cal; my proof: https://keybase.io/sc68ca l/sigs/iFy_WLe4pBG1IlHuwYKFRdgSTsiNMLsct3nIjE5X0RQ