Reuters - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Reuters:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
If another country came into ours and started driving people out, cutting down food trees and putting in settlements, you bet we’d be pissed. But it’s like our politicians have zero empathy and can’t imagine us being in another’s shoes. I know politics requires making hard choices, but must every top politician be a sociopath? It’s very imbalanced.
Yeah, it seems to have worked as expected. Dollarization works to reduce inflation. Now it comes down to a choice: do you impose capital controls and leave monetary sovereignty to the US? (or something hybrid to facilitate import/export)
Option (a): A stable exchange rate and free capital flows (but not an independent monetary policy because setting a domestic interest rate that is different from the world interest rate would undermine a stable exchange rate due to appreciation or depreciation pressure on the domestic currency).
Option (b): An independent monetary policy and free capital flows (but not a stable exchange rate).
It sounds a bit like being a Eurozone country. Free capital flow, fixed exchange rate, no monetary policy. It can work well if you can keep trade balance, but you will be waiting to see what the Fed does and instead of inflation you may have wage stagnation or actual cuts to services to keep a balanced budget. It all depends on being able to export enough to have liquidity to run the economy?
The EU also took option (a) it says below so you’re dead on.
He doesn’t seem opposed to large cuts on services. Issue is if they can’t produce enough goods will they eventually run out of services to cut 👀.
Also seems like stagnation is already at play:
But Argentine wages have remained stagnant or declined, with the monthly minimum wage for regulated workers just $264 as of this month, with workers in the informal economy often paid less.
Reuters - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Reuters:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
Reuters - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)Information for Reuters:
> MBFC: Least Biased - Credibility: High - Factual Reporting: Very High - United Kingdom
> Wikipedia about this source
I don’t think tech people understand how bad it is that Microsoft owns GitHub.
GitLab is one of the few places people could go if GitHub enshittifies too much. Google’s stake in it (or full ownership of it) would probably be a good thing, because it would be seen as an important strategic hedge against Microsoft. If it’s bought by a smaller player, I can see GitHub squeezing it into irrelevance.
Too bad. Microsoft is using it as part of their extremely long term plan to control the software that developers use to do their jobs. VSCode is another front in that battle. Things are going slowly, but they’re winning.
VSCode is another front in that battle. Things are going slowly, but they’re winning.
They replaced Atom with VSCode, but some of the Atom devs are now working on Zed, which finally has Linux support. Or for a paid alternative, we have the Jetbrains suite, which can be excellent if that’s your thing.
For Github, we still have Gitlab as an alternative, but once that goes, we have Gitea or Forgejo to move to.
The thing is that many developers are a vengeful bunch who hate big corps with their enshittification fetishes and love open source solutions. Microsoft has to tread really carefully here.
Ok… but just because someone’s working on an alternative doesn’t mean that alternative will be able to unseat VSCode. Microsoft is spending tens of millions per year to gently lock people into VSCode.
The thing is that many developers are a vengeful bunch who hate big corps with their enshittification fetishes and love open source solutions. Microsoft has to tread really carefully here.
And they have been treading carefully for decades, and it’s working. The people who supposedly hate big corps mostly use GitHub and VSCode. They’re heating the water very, very slowly, and the frogs are staying in the pot.
Something funded by the government but ran by a public org would be ideal.
“the government” which government?
I don’t want software beholden to any state interests. I see donationware as the way to go; or if donations can’t sustain server costs, donations for sustaining development, and then a public flagship instance which people can pay to use, or self-host for their own server costs.
Why the government? There are plenty of free git hosting services out there, take your pick. If gitlab goes away, move to gitea, forgejo, gitosis, etc.
I've been using raw Git for a while now. Glad I switched from GitHub for personal projects.
Can't share worth a shit that way, but 90% of my code is highly specific, personal scripts that I just want to maintain history and notes for. And a book I'm writing.
Yeah, I use personal git repos for most things. But, it’s not as convenient if you want to collaborate on something, or if you want to access features like building docker images and having them put into a repo. There’s definitely a need for a place for open-source and free software projects to live. And, I personally don’t want them on a platform owned by Microsoft.
The moment I realized that “SSH login” on hosted git forges like GitHub literally just means “there’s a folder on a computer that you’re connecting to over SSH” was crazy to me. I realized that there’s no need to selfhost gitlab, gitea, forgejo. Just put a folder on user@host in the repos folder, then set the origin url to user@host:~/repos/myrepo
I think there may be some init commands needed before, like git init --bare or something
I view Gitea as the real alternative to GitHub. I was very big on GitLab for a long time, and think any competition is good, but I’d really like it if more people could seriously invest in Gitea.
Yeah, I don’t see how that’s an issue at all. If Github kicks them, they’ll just push to their own instance. They’d lose a few days to reconfigure the CI/CD or whatever, but that’s about it.
I guess responses like yours is the reason the headline didn’t mention the actual party gitlab is in talks with. People just love to have their villain.
Ignore the headline. Read the article. Gitlab is not about to sell to Google. They are about to sell to Datadog.
Selling to Datadog isn’t a guarantee. The most important detail is that they’re exploring a sale, and other companies are probably going to be interested.
reuters.com
Active