Look, the crystal maze is absolutely essential to run Woodchips without a waterslide. You can complain all you want, but unless you want to run back to Microsoft for your woodchips deployment, this is the way. I’m not saying Gumbies is perfect, here, just that it’s the only viable unix implementation. If you want come up with your own sandcubing solution for Flurble, be my guest.
I really never understood why one would need a GUI for git except for visualizing branches.
I feel like I’m crazy seeing so many people using clicky buttons for tracking files. I need like 4 commands for 95% of what I do and the rest you look up.
You’re already programming! Just learn the tool!
And now there’s a github CLI tool? I hate to beat a dead horse but Microsoft pushing their extended version of an open source tool/protocol is literally the second step of their mantra.
Maybe not a GUI but using a TUI (lazygit) I am certain that I can do everything faster than you could ever do using the CLI. Tbf if a GUI Tool had the same shortcuts it would also be faster.
Checking the diff before commit, solve merge conflicts
Also if it’s well integrated into the IDE it feels less like using a separate tool. For 95% of what I do the ide/gui feels better (fetch, pull, push, commit, checkout, merge). Usually just 2-4 clicks and no need to type the branch name (ticket number and then some)
For Reflog, reset I use the terminal.
If I had to start github desktop or another seperate gui I would use the terminal that’s integrated into the IDE.
I use LazyGit on the CLI for a “GUI-like” experience. I find it helps me make smaller more meaningful commits. If I’m working on a feature that enhances or fixes other modules in my repo to support, its trivial when done to make multiple clean commits out of the one feature that isolates the changes in functionality to individual commits instead of one medium commit.
On a large enough repo (e.g., monorepo), its a pain to do using git commands.
I primarily use GitHub CLI to interact with the GitHub API, not Git. I don’t really see it as an extension of the Git CLI, which I use much more frequently. Everything you can do with it can also be done through their REST API.
I use it for things that aren’t really git features, like:
Syncing repository admin, pull request, and branch control settings across multiple repositories
Checking the status of self-hosted actions runners
Do you use the command line for everything? Do you edit with vim, view diffs with git diff, browse the web with links or lynx?
GUIs are useful tools. I’m happy with VSCode’s git integration. It’s just what I need for basic stuff like staging files and committing. I use the CLI whenever I want to do something like rebasing because I can type that command faster than I can figure out the GUI, but it would be stupid to artificially force myself to use the CLI for everything because of some kind of principal.
Yeah I actually just prefer the command line, I’ve never had to force myself to use it. I even tried using VSC for a bit recently but i couldn’t get myself to like it. I just use nvim with some plugins in a tmux session now and its productive as hell.
Of course I don’t browse the web with the command line. For merging branches, I always merge main into the working branch first, check conflict files, and go through the file finding the diffs and resolving them. I’ve used merge tools before that were sorta nice but I had my own issues with them.
Maybe it’s the type of programming I do. I don’t do any web stuff, so file count is down. For larger code bases I keep a non editor terminal up and will grep -re for word/phrase searching, find to look for specific files, etc. I’ll occasionally use an IDE, typically eclipse based because embedded, but I don’t find myself missing the features they add.
Of course I don’t browse the web with the command line.
That’s my point. Browsing the web with a command line tool is obnoxious - you use a GUI for tasks that you find easier/more pleasant to do with a GUI. The difference is where that line is. When I’m reviewing what work I’ve done and checking through my code for debugging statements and other cruft I don’t want to push, I prefer to have a nice tree view of my change set where I can click on an item, see what I’ve changed, select lines and stage them, select other lines and revert them, etc. I could do all of that with command line tools (though not that many have mouse support) but I already know how to do exactly what I want with VSC so why would I use anything else?
You’re already programming! Just learn the tool!
If someone is incapable of learning the tool, that’s an issue if they’re a developer. But your statement implies that everyone should use the CLI for everything. My point is that it’s a matter of preference. The CLI is not superior and GUIs aren’t superior. They’re both just tools and if you can get your job done quickly and efficiently, that’s all that should matter.
The CLI is scriptable/automatable and unambiguous when sharing instructions with coworkers. Both of these things make it very useful to know the commands. I do agree that it helps in some situations to visualize what is going on with a GUI/TUI though (neogit for nvim or magit for emacs are great if anyone is wondering), it can make things clearer at a glance.
I agree that it is a very useful skill to know how to use the CLI. I agree that every senior developer should know how and every junior should be capable of learning. I vehemently disagree that developers should use the CLI as their regular means of interacting with Git if that is not their preference.
I find myself in a state of uncertainty regarding the particular group of ladies to which you are making reference within the confines of our conversation.
Microsoft do make money from Linux though. For example, Microsoft SQL Server runs on Linux, and you can use Linux in Azure (both of which are part of their core business).
Microsoft’s operating system accounts for a vanishingly small percentage of server hosting, and their deathgrip on personal computing is starting to slip. (Particularly as Android has already replaced Windows as the most popular operating system.)
Microsoft is well past “not worried”, looking at “too late to do anything about it” in the rear view mirror, and barreling toward “cease to exist if they don’t continue to stick the landing on interoperability with Linux and Android”.
Microsoft’s long term relevance plan counts on cloud tools on Linux and their Office Suite on every platform.
As someone who often runs apps on hardware the app was never meant to run on, it’s not great.
There may be a unified Android / Linux package type coming, when more laptops are touchscreens and more phones are dockable workstations. But I doubt the Windows kernel will have much to do with either.
How is that Nvidia can ban reverse engineering and for example Nintendo can’t. I’m sure they would love to just say in EULA that sorry but reverse engineering Switch is prohibited therefore every emulator is illegal
Well, maybe they can’t. This clause would probably not hold up in a lot of countries/courts. OTOH it would in others. It might take years of litigation to figure out.
So, if you want to work on this kind of thing, better consult a lawyer first. It will have a chilling effect and that’s something.
These companies are wielding way too much power if they are not afraid to act like this in the open. Bring back making the board of executives and C Suites lives hell when a company so much as inconveniences you.
Just to play Devils advokat here: Wouldn’t that just completely discourage anyone from taking up a new CEO or similar role since you are now liable for some illegal activities that might have happened without your knowledge and long time ago.
You would at least need very good evidence beyond reasonable doubt that the person in question actively put into motion the illegal activity and knew that it was illegal.
Placing blame on a single individual might feel satisfying but does not nessesarly punish the correct responsible. When cooperations get as large as Nvidia, Intel etc. it functions in my opinion like one giant complex organism and legal issues like these are often systemic and involves hundreds of people who took decisions.
I think massive and progressive fines are in fact a good tool because it punishes the “organism” that is truly to blame and not an individual who might be to blame.
I agree but yet here we are… And I don’t think just putting people in jail helps. But it should definitely have consequences, that’s for sure, but they must first be effective for what they are trying to solve.
Exactly. Same in every club, society and whatnot. The power hungry with strong narcissistic traits (not the mental health diagnosis, mind you) are those who promote their buddies and do everything to stay in power. Its essentially the single biggest problem we have. You can pin mostly all and everything that is wrong with our world on those traits (basically the dark triad), yet they are promoted everywhere. You need to have „elbows“ even in primary school. Just a fool wouldn’t see the outcome of that.
Disincentivizing people taking up massive responsibilities that affect the wellbeing of more than a hundred people, sometimes billions, is absolutely the best way to insure that only selfless and competent people take the position.
Fuck em, CEOs are a waste of space, just make everything a cooperative or something.
I think it is naive to think that only selfless and competent people will take the role then. If properly competent you’d see the massive risk of jail and be highly discouraged to take the position. Noone in their right mind would risk jailtime for a job position.
On the other hand, billionaires, risktakers and gamblers would be more than willing to take such a role for the power it gives. They don’t really care since billionaires manage their risks with all the money they have, and risktakers and gamblers simply just dont care about it untill it hits them.
If selfish or incompetent people take the role they go to jail, if highly ethical people take the role they don’t go to jail. Generally how laws are supposed to be written.
Well sometimes it is… very much subjective… That’s why different countries have different laws. Each country have subjective views on what should be punished or not and how much punishment is right. If Ethics is always objective and like a maths equation that can be solved we should all just have the same laws because it’s objective.
And you played the devils advocate well but the reality is very different. As a former CEO I can tell you that there definitely are jail sentences possible for rather minor offenses (where I live, mind you) like not answering a letter by the government because you were busy. Granted, you do have to be very overwhelmed to not answer those for an extended period but it happens.
But its the same for small companies that male no profit as it is for multi billion dollar companies.
I suppose you get the problem here. We have always pinned it on the individual because fines are a corpos wet dream. Same readon why the country I live in has mostly fines for speeding (so it doesnt affect the rich).
So, mandatory jail sentences, increasing with the companies profit.
I want to see fines that have real teeth. No flat rates. Some defined amount per violation, in addition to forfeiture of all revenue derived from or connected to the violation(s). It might be complex to figure out what revenue that applies to inside a large corporation, so to help with the assessment you get a group of government auditors attached to your company for as long as the assessment takes. You pay their wages and provide them with whatever office space &etc they require, and they have a position on your executive board and full oversight of company operations until your debt to society is fully paid.
Regulatory violations should risk ending the company. If you can’t run a profitable business legally then you shouldn’t be running a business.
Personally, I think it would be easier for all involved to just fine based on a percentage of global annual revenue from the date of the violation to present. If they want personhood so bad, then they can have this too.
Edit for an example: let’s say Intel does anticompetitive behavior 15 years ago and a court case finds them liable for damages today. Add up the last 15 years worth of global revenue, and take a percentage of that.
Making it easy is precisely not the point. Having to deal with auditors combing through your accounting records and overseeing your operations until every dollar of illegally gained revenue is accounted for is the point.
The consequence should be onerous, cumbersome and embarrassing for the company.
I get what you mean, but I prefer massive fines due immediately vs expensive and drawn out processes. Using my example, the very absolute bottom of the barrel Intel’s fine could be is a percentage of over $500B (Intel’s revenue in 2009 was $35B, multiplied by 15). Even at 1% based on this floor, the fine would be over $5B.
Europeans People Party, large political party within the EU which is largely full of conservative right-wing folks with the german Ursula Gertrud von der Leyen at it’s top. She is also currently president of the European Commission and has been known to be involved in corruption and to favour company interests, as well as the rest of the fuckers in the EPP.
So I guess the context is: If EPP stays in power, that’s good for top-business-people, but bad for everyone else. Thereby detrimental for such competitive-practise-laws.
Europeans People Party, large political party within the EU which is largely full of conservative right-wing folks
First the EPP is center-right, not conservative right-wing.
So I guess the context is: If EPP stays in power, that’s good for top-business-people, but bad for everyone else.
Second there’s too much leftists’ bullshit already in EU member states and all that power vacuum created by key keep such as Angela Merkel leaving governments created all the right conditions for the US, Ukraine and Russia to start a war at the EU border that only benefits the USA and has a large economical impact on the EU.
Not sure if you know how the EU “parties” work but the members aren’t directly elected like in other places. They simply have a bunch of chairs that get filled with people from member state parties that applied to be part of that EU level organization. We most likely shouldn’t even call them political parties.
I give it about 10 years before the EU is invaded by the US after corporate lobbying
No need. The US most likely pushed Ukraine and Russia into a war that essentially is a way to put so much pressure in the EU economy that things will fail one way or the other.
The US promptly forgot that Ukraine existed once they gave Russia their nukes back, and didn’t bother to think about them again until Russia invaded. The major exception being Hunter Biden, and he has never been in politics so he doesn’t count.
Russia (and Putin) are so weak the USA forced them to invade their neighbour?
I’m not saying that is or that isn’t the case. What I know is that in this war, right after Ukraine, the EU is the most affected party. The US is the one that has most to gain from destabilizing the EU economy and weakening the Euro.
In general, it translates instructions into something readable by whats accessing it. A popular translation layer on Lemmy is Proton. Its how the Steam Deck can play all those windows games.
Cuda is an Nvidia specific method for using a graphics card to do computation (not just graphics), like physics simulations.
Translation layers would let you use software designed for other graphics cards to work with Cuda, or to let Cuda software work on other graphics cards
Less that they don’t want other companies using it and more so they don’t want other other companies translating it into something they can use.
Basically, translating an instruction manual from German to Spanish.
No one is breaking any copyright laws or IP to do this. It’s the same how Steam created Proton to run Windows games on Linux. It’s translating code from one language to another that’s readable.
If Linux becomes the dominant gaming platform for gaming (not gonna happen, wish it would tho), there is no reason for a “Proton for Windows” could/should emerge.
Hey now. That all depends on how popular Steam Deck handhelds keep getting and if future versions of windows keep getting worse and more ad intrusive like windows 11 has done. Gaming on Linux has gotten much easier and at some point the chunk of people on Linux will be high enough (it’s gone from 1.6% in 2019 to 4% now) that devs will decide its worth it to make Linux compatible games. I have a desktop at home that still works as a pretty good gaming rig at home, but win 11 isn’t supported by my processor. Once win 10 stops getting support it will be running Linux only. A lot of preventing a full switch over now is the anti cheat software some major studios use on their online games that won’t run on Linux.
Oh, I drive Linux only. I have Windows 10 running Atlas playbook on standby but hasn’t been booted in months.
I think the entry barrier for installation/setup is what will be what stops Linux fully taking over. If OEMs start loading a very user friendly Linux on their “normal” desktops/laptops (Best Buy, Amazon, etc.), then I can see Linux being the majority.
With all that said, I want Linux to be the majority and running on everyone’s computer. I’m just being a realist at this point in time.
CUDA was there first and has established itself as the standard for GPGPU (“general purpose GPU” aka calculating non-graphics stuff on a graphics card). There are many software packages out there that only support CUDA, especially in the lucrative high-performance computing market.
Most software vendors have no intention of supporting more than one API since CUDA works and the market isn’t competitive enough for someone to need to distinguish themselves though better API support.
Thus Nvidia have a lock on a market that regularly needs to buy expensive high-margin hardware and they don’t want to share. So they made up a rule that nobody else is allowed to write out use something that makes CUDA software work with non-Nvidia GPUs.
That’s anticompetitive but it remains to be seen if it’s anticompetitive enough for the EU to step in.
I guess I’m missing who owns/developed Cuda, then. Like, why does Nvidia think they can disallow anyone else from using Cuda if Cuda was made and broadly used as the API before Nvidia.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.