<gchristensen>
I am really hitting the jackpot of annoying hardware problems today, I'd better get offline before I get real grumpy.
<joepie91>
gchristensen: ah, you're having one of Those Days?
<gchristensen>
yes :(
<joepie91>
where everything suddenly breaks for no clear reason?
<joepie91>
those suck :P
<joepie91>
at least going to sleep seems to solve them
<joepie91>
wonder if anybody has done research into the cause of this, I know it's something that quite a lot of people run into
<joepie91>
days where otherwise-working stuff all breaks
<gchristensen>
on laptop-sleep I get [drm:intel_display_resume [i915]] *ERROR* Restoring old state failed with -22 and then I have to power off
<gchristensen>
hehe, probably just coincidence + a feeling of being tired or something
<samueldr>
I had that, the other day, when doint AMT things, I think what brought upon me the feeling is how this was so foreign to me, and hard to diagnose :/
<samueldr>
"that" being the feeling that everything is cursed beyond repair
<gchristensen>
yeah! a helplessness from not knowing
<samueldr>
then, hot off the heels of AMT just starting to work, the dang thing didn't want to resume from sleep!
<gchristensen>
I wish it was the sakura theme though :)
<ldlework>
gchristensen: what i like about wpgtk is that on the regular i'll be a little frustrated while working for no reason and i'll realize it's that my theme is just not quite conveniently readable as i like or something and i switch a few times until something just "feels right" and then i use that until this very thing happens again
<ldlework>
trying to find a theme that i have to stick with and be satisfied with all the time seem unlikely - maybe it's just because of having had the convenience dunno
<gchristensen>
:)
<gchristensen>
I really like emacs' colors
<jackdk>
I really like the EGA palette
<gchristensen>
that is probably sakura's
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 258 seconds]
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-chat
<ottidmes>
gchristensen: you got good taste, I am using the Dracula theme in all my editors :)
drakonis has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
jackdk has quit [Ping timeout: 257 seconds]
jasongrossman has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
pie___ has joined #nixos-chat
pie__ has quit [Ping timeout: 244 seconds]
jasongrossman has joined #nixos-chat
ottidmes has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
endformationage has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.3]
johanot has joined #nixos-chat
__monty__ has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has joined #nixos-chat
__monty__ has quit [Quit: Lost terminal]
clever has quit [Ping timeout: 246 seconds]
__monty__ has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has quit [Quit: hedning]
hedning has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has quit [Quit: hedning]
hedning has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has quit [Quit: hedning]
hedning has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has quit [Quit: hedning]
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 240 seconds]
drakonis_ has quit [Read error: Connection reset by peer]
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has joined #nixos-chat
hedning has quit [Quit: hedning]
ninjin has joined #nixos-chat
endformationage has joined #nixos-chat
ottidmes has joined #nixos-chat
philipp[m] has joined #nixos-chat
<philipp[m]>
I know that it's obnoxious and not really helpfull but I sometimes really have to hold me back from opening "drop the legacy package management and start supporting nix" issues in the trackers of a few distributions.
<simpson>
Why?
<philipp[m]>
Broken dependencies on freebsd again after major upgrades because somebody moved libraries around and other packages didn't get rebuilt properly.
<gchristensen>
heh
__monty__ has quit [Quit: leaving]
<gchristensen>
emaste, I don't believe, is very impressed with Nix
johanot has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.2]
drakonis has joined #nixos-chat
<simpson>
There are dozens of lurking BSD users around who want to improve Nix support for those systems but aren't sure how to contribute. (I'm not one of them but I've heard their cries in the night.)
<gchristensen>
yeah
<gchristensen>
hydra.nixos.org used to build for bsd
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 252 seconds]
hedning has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 264 seconds]
drakonis has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis_ has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
yl has joined #nixos-chat
<andi->
I am waiting on a bump of docbook on OpenBSD to "finish" building Nix on there and then the real fun can properly start..
<samueldr>
<3
<gchristensen>
I'm surprised you can't cross compile a reasonable docbook for freebsd
drakonis has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis has quit [Client Quit]
drakonis has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.2]
drakonis has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis_ has quit [Ping timeout: 250 seconds]
nckx- has joined #nixos-chat
drakonis1 has joined #nixos-chat
nckx has quit [Ping timeout: 255 seconds]
nckx- is now known as nckx
<colemickens>
did your 9380 issues resolve?
<gchristensen>
it has some unpredictableness around if it wakes up from sleep
* joepie91
has been having an... insightful few weeks lately
<gchristensen>
and the dock has been terrible since I bought it a year ago
<joepie91>
just realized that I've apparently been gradually relearning to patternmatch/understand my emotions over the past 10 years, as if nearly all understanding of my own emotions vanished and I had to start over at puberty
<joepie91>
the joy of mental breakdowns...
<gchristensen>
joepie91: <3
<joepie91>
I'm doing fine now thankfully, I've actually been making massive leaps forwards in terms of mental health in the past few weeks or so, but it's just weird to suddenly realize one of the major things that was wrong for the past decade
<joepie91>
after that mental breakdown (which I actually blogged about: http://cryto.net/~joepie91/blog/2014/04/07/depression/) pretty much the only identifiable emotions I had left were sadness and anger, and looking at things in retrospect, I've been gradually relearning how to recognize other emotions over the years, one by one... and I seem to have one particularly tricky emotion left on the todo list, which is love, which is especially difficult to
<joepie91>
relearn because making mistakes in learning to deal with that isn't quite as socially accepted from adults as it is from teenagers :P
<joepie91>
gchristensen: didn't know about that, will have a look, thanks
<jasongrossman>
joepie91: Some people speak highly of Hillary Rettig's work on mental health for activists. But I expect you already know about it or something similar. I'm really saying "hugs" more than anything.
<joepie91>
jasongrossman: never heard of her before, tbh
<joepie91>
seems relevant though
<joepie91>
and thanks :)
<jasongrossman>
joepie91: I haven't read her book myself, but it's been recommended to me by animal rights activists, and also by rms!
jasongrossman has quit [Quit: ERC (IRC client for Emacs 26.1)]
<ottidmes>
joepie91: thats basically 2 different issues, text based communications, and the granularity of of what constitutes a thing in "do one thing and do it well".
<joepie91>
ottidmes: only referring to the tweet, not the entire thread :)
* joepie91
has rambled out a subthread elsewhere about what constitutes a 'thing'
<joepie91>
(tl;dr it totally depends on what level of abstraction you're looking at)
* colemickens
keeps observing what should be an unsurprising overlap in NixOS and early sway users.
<ottidmes>
joepie91: I am a big fan of the "do one thing and do it well", hence I tend to dislike most frameworks, preferring selecting a set of libraries instead.
<joepie91>
aye, though the modular-library world definitely has some work to do as well :)
<joepie91>
mostly in terms of curation
<ottidmes>
joepie91: could you provide me a link? I find that stuff super interesting
<ottidmes>
I used to do a lot of web development (even when IE6 was still relevant), and I always made it a point to make JS to only act as enhancements, often with the exception of admin interfaces
<joepie91>
ottidmes: aye, unfortunately progressive enhancement has basically been forgotten as a concept, in the past ~6 years of SPA hype
<joepie91>
and further coopted terminology-wise by Google with their Progressive Web Apps nonsense
<ottidmes>
agreed
<joepie91>
ottidmes: so on a slightly depressing note there, I regularly speak to webdevs who are genuinely unaware that there is such a thing as form submission support in browsers
<joepie91>
sometimes they are not even aware of hyperlinks being usable for navigating between pages
<joepie91>
without custom JS
<ottidmes>
its weird how technology can make you feel old, in just a few years :P
<joepie91>
mmyeah
<joepie91>
it mostly just annoys me :)
<samueldr>
joepie91: :(
<joepie91>
every day I get to explain the exact same thing to 3 different people and unteach them the exact same bad habits
<samueldr>
I wished you were only kidding
<joepie91>
things that we *solved* as a community years ago
<joepie91>
it's regressive
<joepie91>
and a massive waste of time for everybody who cares about building good software
<joepie91>
unfortunately, much of this is driven by big tech companies
<joepie91>
who... generally care very little about the health of the web, or the quality of software
<joepie91>
and who have so incredibly much reach that it's very very difficult to stop the tide of bad advice
<joepie91>
(mostly looking at Google and Facebook here, they're some of the worst offenders)
<samueldr>
I had to re-explain what the semantic web was, to one new dev who wasn't aware to what it was, to one ~10y light experience, who forgot, today
<joepie91>
for quite a few years, whatever thing they crapped out would be treated as the best liquid gold since sliced bread
<joepie91>
even if it was utterly crap, or highly experimental, or super specific to one usecase and not portable to others\
<joepie91>
with no attempt made on their end to keep people from using it for the wrong things
<samueldr>
(to explain why you don't put class="red" basically)
<joepie91>
and why would they? the more people use their stuff, the more control they have over the industry
<joepie91>
samueldr: yeah...
<samueldr>
nobody can build the next best thing if they're all busy using your new worse thing to build their next app :/
<joepie91>
basically
<joepie91>
samueldr: there's another really big problem here that goes mostly unreported
<joepie91>
samueldr: namely: the shiny tools crapped out by the big tech companies and VC-funded startups alike, are very specifically tailored to very specific kinds of applications
<joepie91>
which I'll category as "shiny line-of-business applications"
<joepie91>
data in, data out, nothing particularly novel
<joepie91>
and well, when an entire ecosystem is built around tools that can only deal with uninnovative LoB applications... and that totally break down when you try to do anythiing weird...
<joepie91>
that has a significant effect on the kind of software that people build
<joepie91>
and so everything becomes an App, or a SaaS thing that doesn't need to be, because *that's what the tools encourage*
<joepie91>
nobody tackles the hard problems or the things that advance society
<samueldr>
yeah, a big ol... uh... set of blinders (the thing for horses)
<joepie91>
everything serves to build a startup that will eventually be acquired by a big tech co
<joepie91>
moving around numbers on paper
<joepie91>
I've seen this happen especially in the Node ecosystem
<joepie91>
where over the past ~3-4 years, almost the entire ecosystem has been consumed by such unreliable startuppy tools
<samueldr>
Big C uses technology F and G to do X, well, the cargo culting is going to follow suite, and try using F and G for Y and Z even :/
<joepie91>
whereas it was previously an extremely innovative ecosystem with implementations for anything you might think of, lots of experimental tech
<joepie91>
lots of grassroots stuff
<joepie91>
but then the startup industry rolled in, and now that's basically dead
<samueldr>
big tarpits
<joepie91>
and everybody is now building "Facebook, but for Amphibians"
<joepie91>
</rant>
<simpson>
samueldr: Blinders are a great way of putting it. Folks are focused on following the paths ahead of them and have serious trouble seeing the other possibilities. Everybody's focused on disrupting what's in front of them.
<joepie91>
tl;dr this is why I absolutely despise commercial software development, and the startup industry with its 'fake innovation' in particular
<joepie91>
it destroys every ecosystem it touches
<samueldr>
follow the horse's butt in front of you
<joepie91>
oh, bonus points for Google who's increasingly trying to destroy the open web through Chrome, by the way
<joepie91>
something something fucking with URL display something
<averell>
let's put a limit on adblock filters, for security :)
<joepie91>
context: Google indicating that they intend to selectively hide parts of URLs/hostnames
<joepie91>
URLs need to have nothing up their sleeve for the open web to function correctly, basically
<samueldr>
don't forget safari
<samueldr>
did the same thing way before
<colemickens>
the behavior in Chrome is jarring right now - the url jumps around when you focus the url bar, etc.
<samueldr>
yeah, that's terrible
<colemickens>
plus I have a gut reaction now that HTTPS pages have no visual indicator that I'm getting phished when I'm halfway through filling out my CC details
<samueldr>
here, let me insert the caret at that precise loca---HA
<samueldr>
URLs shouldn't be toyed with :/
<colemickens>
I'm letting all my domains expire and replacing them with onion urls.
<samueldr>
if we don't want URLs might as well go back to AOL keywords
<colemickens>
^ only partially serious|joking
<joepie91>
samueldr: ta-da
<joepie91>
I strongly suspect that that is basically exactly Google's endgame
<samueldr>
it does smell like it
<joepie91>
make all addressing go through them in the form of search queries
<samueldr>
and it helps they seem to be having (probably uncoordinated) help on the safari "apple is all privacy and security only" side
* samueldr
should stop ranting
* samueldr
hates the ranty samueldr
<joepie91>
I hate the ranty joepie91 as well but unfortunately it is sometimes necessary :P
<samueldr>
joepie91: you do know that google is *exactly* doing that?
<joepie91>
either to blow off steam or to point out problems that others are not aware of, or both
<samueldr>
search with a recent version of chrome on google, (maybe A/B tested) and you won't see google.com
<samueldr>
you'll see your keywords
<colemickens>
wow
<joepie91>
welp, that confirms that I suppose
<colemickens>
that's egregious
<samueldr>
which may be "good UX" *when you consider the user entered their keywords there*, but terrible when you consider this is the only location for the URL
disasm has joined #nixos-chat
* samueldr
doesn't know how to trigger it
<samueldr>
I had it on a demo chromebook unit a couple days ago in a store
disasm has quit [Client Quit]
<colemickens>
I can just imagine the commercial: shot of the URL bar in Chrome "just search 'dog shit' in Chrome|Google today!" with the URL bar, the magnifying glass icon and "dog shit".
* colemickens
is ranty too, should watch his language
jackdk has joined #nixos-chat
<joepie91>
I think we can collectively draw the conclusion here that Google is a bad actor :)
<samueldr>
I hate it because "yes", but "no", it's just like the good old "sony makes crap because of [insert division here]" except google has even blurrier divisions from the outside :/
<samueldr>
but cohesively, there is a BIG slice of google acting badly
<samueldr>
and plausibly I say parts are unknowingly helping :(
<samueldr>
basically: they're too big, so attributing things to Google, anyhing, is bound to be answered by both yes and no :/
* samueldr
is a bit oversimplifying
<joepie91>
samueldr: the problem is that there is no way to remove the bad and only get the good; especially given that their business model inherently drives them towards unethical things
<joepie91>
so for all practical purposes, they are a bad actor
<samueldr>
yeah
<colemickens>
I wonder how much internal pushback there is from Chromium devs.
<joepie91>
exactly how that is divided internally, is their problem
<samueldr>
what I hate is basically waving anything they do as bad as a lump sum :(
disasm has joined #nixos-chat
<colemickens>
It seems to be the way of the world these days
<samueldr>
because I think in *any* such cases, it only help it happen
<disasm>
fpletz: moved my IRC client to a cloud instance so I have chat again!
<samueldr>
kind of a corollary to a self-fulfilliing prophecy
<samueldr>
"google is bad thus everyting they do is bad is bound to make them do bad things only"
<joepie91>
samueldr: from a practical perspective, there is no other way for things to go
<joepie91>
it operates as one entity
<joepie91>
so it is IMO fully justified
<samueldr>
that's not a google-only thing
<samueldr>
once a thing is labelled as a sum as bad
<joepie91>
especially as any leeway given to Google, considering that there is no public oversight, directly supports the bad parts
<disasm>
fpletz: sorry I had to run and grab the train when you walked away. Looks like things are wrapping up here around lunch tomorrow. Anything going on Friday evening in Munich?
<joepie91>
samueldr: I'm aware
<joepie91>
yet Google is the current threat
<samueldr>
and not giving signal of the good things they do is what I think is the least helpful bit
<joepie91>
this would be different if Google were accountable to the public, or was built according to a cooperative model where internal checks are reasonably possible
<joepie91>
but it's not
<joepie91>
so any material support of any part of the company ends up directly and inevitably supporting the bad bits
<joepie91>
samueldr: I don't think there's any value in talking about the 'good bits' when there are thousands of people doing good bits *without* ending up as a net negative
<joepie91>
again: any support given to Google as an organization, either financially or PR-wise, directly supports the bad parts, and there is no realistic way to prevent that from happening
<joepie91>
those bad parts *far* outweigh the good parts at this point
<samueldr>
then we'll have to disagree, I'm not saying "push $bad's good thing in front of the queue", but signaling anything $bad does as bad in a willfully ignorant way peeves me
<joepie91>
it makes no sense to lend any credibility to the organization on that basis
<joepie91>
samueldr: that's not what I'm doing.
<samueldr>
not saying that's what you're doing
<joepie91>
then why bring it up?
<joepie91>
it doesn't seem constructive to argue against points that aren't being made, while not addressing those that are
<samueldr>
the whole everything must be black OR white that's generally generalized in "the conversation" is harmful imho
<samueldr>
(really not even about google here)
<joepie91>
that doesn't really answer my question though
<samueldr>
maybe we started talking past eachother earlier?
<samueldr>
I don't know when
<joepie91>
like, the thing you originally disagreed with was my statement that Google is effectively a bad actor; but you never really provided any rationale for that disagreement, instead starting to argue against a point I didn't make
<joepie91>
as if they are equivalent points
<samueldr>
I'm not sure I can answer where the discussion went past :/
<samueldr>
I think we went on divergent tangents (are those even mathematically possible?)
<samueldr>
or at least I did
<joepie91>
samueldr: btw, the reason I'm going on about this, is because this is something I see people do a lot recently - the moment some kind of absolute-sounding statement comes in, even if that statement is in principle correct, people start trying to negotiate it down to a more 'moderate' position, often without having a clear rationale for doing so
<samueldr>
(and now I have to go)
<simpson>
They're an actor. Classifying everything that they do as bad is iffy; there's several Google data silos that, while not completely public, are largely public in a way that massively benefits the public. The newsgroup archives, the vast majority of Youtube's uploads, and GDocs/GMail free personal storage, in particular.
<joepie91>
and I think most people do it subconsciously, and it seems a fairly recent thing
<joepie91>
with the whole both-sides-ism lately
<joepie91>
but it really tends to derail discussions because nothing ever gets concluded, nothing ever gets decided to a point of actionability, everything is always up in the air
<simpson>
Google also pays the salaries of more than a few FLOSS developers, even if it's true that at the same time they have issues respecting FLOSS and allowing employees to do what they like.
<joepie91>
simpson: discoverability of the deja news archives went down significantly after Google's acquisition of the service; and GDocs is severely limited in terms of accessibility and locking up a lot of previously self-hosted and freely-available documents (along with Scribd, incidentally)
<joepie91>
these were strict downgrades from the previous situation
<joepie91>
the youtube situation is more debatable
<joepie91>
and of course, most all of it is locked behind google's anti-scraping wall
<joepie91>
and I am not 'classifying everything they do as bad'; I am classifying *the actor as a whole* as bad
<joepie91>
because it is producing a significant net negative effect, and has shown absolutely zero intention of cleaning up their act
<joepie91>
you're basically arguing against the exact same point I just told samueldr I wasn't making
<simpson>
If they're a bad actor, but not always with every action, then surely we can put a probability on *how often* they're a bad actor. And then we can do comparisons with their peers, perhaps.
<joepie91>
I don't see why comparisons with their peers would be relevant
<joepie91>
if there's overwhelming evidence of them being a net negative factor
<simpson>
Because I'd rather deal with Oracle first than Google first, after doing a back-of-napkin estimate of bad actors in the Bay.
<joepie91>
Oracle isn't continuously breaking down public infrastructure piece by piece, as far as I am aware.
<joepie91>
and this statement presumes that you can only address one problem at once, which is nonsense.
<simpson>
Hey, it depends on what's relevant to you. Oracle directly negatively affects my local government in ways that can be counted in USD; Google does not. I understand the desire to be simple in our marking of bad actors, but there's not enough evidence that the actor is bad through and through.
<joepie91>
"through and through" is an irrelevant and arbitrary bar to meet
<simpson>
I'm just saying that maybe an empirical, data-driven "99% bad actor" could be more attainable and convincing than a subjective, rant-driven "the actor as a whole is bad".
johanot has quit [Quit: WeeChat 2.2]
<joepie91>
the problem is that that approach is basically a free pass for any bad actor that has negative effects that are not quantifiable as an absolute number
<joepie91>
which... just so happens to describe the most problematic bad actors
<joepie91>
namely those which never release enough information to let you conclusively determine their intentions
Guanin has joined #nixos-chat
<joepie91>
but more than enough over a long period of time to conclude that those intentions are bad for $targetDemographic
<simpson>
Sure. It could be that the main differentiator between us is the number of secret Google memos read.
<joepie91>
and the most important indicator of a bad actor is when they fail to implement structural changes in response to past incidents / negative effects
<joepie91>
which just so happens to not be quantifiable as an absolute number
<joepie91>
not everything can be expressed as a pile of numbers or a mathematical equation, and if you're expecting numbers as proof for a bad actor, that's the perfect environment for a bad actor to thrive in unchecked
<joepie91>
which is a problem that's pervasive throughout software dev, incidentally
<simpson>
Maybe. But it sounds more like an unwillingness to do research and arithmetic.
<joepie91>
I don't see a problem with that
Guanin has quit [Remote host closed the connection]