Devbox will give you the same project environment (packages, env-vars) on your work and home laptop. It leverages nix, and uses your native file-system avoiding the overhead and complexity of using Docker.
yikes! thanks for pointing that out. The blog's renderer is confused too and renders the `#cowsay -- flakes are neat` as a comment.
To explain what's happening:
- The example above is running `nix run <flake output attribute> -- <arguments to pass to the flake output's binary>`.
- The `<flake output attribute>` here is `.#cowsay`, which is to be read as: `<flake reference>#<attribute path>`. The # is a separator here.
- The `<flake reference>` being `.` implies its a local flake at the current directory.
The `<attribute path>` in this case is the output from the flake i.e. the `cowsay` program.
As a meta-comment, yeah, this is kinda non-trivial for most of us. This is why we build devbox which provides a more familiar UX like `devbox add cowsay && devbox run -- cowsay "flakes are neat"`
I think this is a great strength of flakes. Packaging an application can sometimes have nuances that external folks may not be fully aware of and so having the packaging instructions (i.e. flake.nix) defined in the core repository can narrow that knowledge gap.
The title is simply literally the question that I was thinking about a few months ago when working on Devbox, and wrote a version of this post internally to answer the question for myself!
There is a very good presentation on the Case for Electronic Cash by Jerry Brito of the Coin Center non-profit. I highly recommend people watch it to understand why cash is important to preserve an open, liberal society.
Why is it not sustainable that household wealth is > 500% of GDP?
In the parlance of company finances, GDP is like revenue and wealth is the valuation representing the present value of all future profits. So, it seems fine to me that the present value of future profits of the US is 5x the current revenue.
I'm seeking to understand where this analogy may break down. Thanks :)
that's a cynical view. Capitalism is the freedom to buy and sell from whoever you choose. If what you choose to sell is something so unique, you'll escape competition.
1. I did a google search of "site:news.ycombinator.com Foxconn in Wisconsin", and opened the top 3 links.
2. first link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19037625. The top comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19038615) seems to be about cronyism and corruption in the terms offered to Foxconn by the Wisconsis government? I could be a bit off, i haven't followed that story closely. But, and this is important, its not about generalized corruption, its about corruption on this Foxconn deal!
4. third link https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19630358. This one doesn't have much commentary, but here we see irrelevant comments which are not directly tied to the article, which are much in the vein of the original comment above.
Does that help clarify my position, and why comments of this nature are not helpful? Its totally fine to bring up environmental/social/political concerns, if they are relevant. They are not in this case.
I felt it was patronizing because the original article is about manufacturing progress in a country that has been notoriously behind the curve on manufacturing. Making iphones is not what one normally associates as a dirty or polluting industrial effort.
Instead of directly discussing the merit (or not) of this move by Apple, you chose to bring up an unrelated topic of general environmental problems in India.
Lets imagine the article was about Apple opening a new manufacturing facility in Texas. Would you have brought up other social/political/environmental challenges that Texas faces (oh i don't know, like racial equity, or floods)? My guess is that would be unlikely, since its kinda off-topic and would be clear you are trying to express some other gratuitous concern you may have about that region.
fair point - not sure why you are being downvoted.
Lets say SF to Chicago, then? Its about 2000 miles.
I was trying to illustrate a more general point that speed isn't necessarily the best or most optimal criteria even for long distances. My choice of example could have been better.
Every year that goes by where India doesn't raise its standard of living, results in millions of stunted childhoods and lives. India needs all the manufacturing growth it can get.
The equivalent to your comment would be Indians on this forum leaving gratuitious remarks about the West ruining the planet with its excessively polluting ways. Just because you cannot see it around you, doesn't mean its not happening.
counter-intuitively, bullet trains offer a great alternative that airlines cannot: travelling from SF to NY in about 10-12 hours. 8 hours to sleep on a flat bed, and an hour or two for dinner and breakfast on either end.
This would be far superior to the 5-hour red eye flights.