Personally I find the 1Password X browser extension is perfectly fine for my 1Password needs on my Linux desktop. That said the extension probably isn’t as good if you have a lot of server passwords or accounts you have to enter a lot in desktop apps. This isn’t a problem for me because I only use 1Password for web logins anyway, my various network passwords are easier to organize in pass.
> That does not come with a simple way to have your passwords and automatically though.
I suspect a typo, but could you describe the problem in more detail? I'm using KeepassXC, and while there are a few challenges around workflow, there's nothing insurmountable.
I guess for most of us on HN the big delineation is -- can you sync your password store easily (and exclusively) to your own systems, vs can you sync easily with a remote managed service.
I'm very much in the camp that eschews the latter.
As per my comment elsewhere in this thread, I've got a reasonably robust arrangement using a combination of Syncthing and KeePassXC, which so far has worked well for me.
Thanks for putting so much effort into Redis! The software itself is awesome (I've been using it one way or another over the span of nearly a decade now), and in my opinion anyway you've handled the project and yourself in an exemplary way. You're the only programmer I can really say I think of as a personal hero. Best of luck in the future!
The company feels it can decide your quality of life for you, instead of your compensation. It's kind of unethical (imo) but not uncommon. I'm fortunate that my current remote employer does not engage in this sort of thing.
I am incredibly thankful for my wife, my job, my family, my privileged upbringing, my pets, the tech industry in general (even though I am contemptuous towards it at times) and most immediately a warm safe place to sleep.
I cannot imagine the feeling of pride you must have if you worked on the Voyager program in any capacity. The first interstellar spacecraft, over 40 years old, and someone's still writing FORTRAN or ASM for it. So cool.
If by "outlive" you mean "continue to exist"... the Voyagers have a finite useful lifespan defined by the output of their RTGs, and that's expected to drop below useable levels sometime around 2025 (for both craft). But they'll still be out there, barring a random encounter with an asteroid or something.
I think that two grains of sand on beaches of the opposite ends of the Earth are probably more likely to interact than a random rock and a tiny satellite that has left the Solar System into interstellar space.
In fact, in about 40,000 years, Voyager 1 will pass within about 1.6 light-years of the star Gliese 445. It's also likely that it's as close to a star as Voyager 1 will be again, ever.
Space is pretty empty compared to Earth or even our own Solar System.
I know this sounds contrived, but imagine the mission beeing not reliant on continous operation, but just a operation of any kind to continue.
Could one just harvest the background radiation for energy, and switch on, once some storage capacitator reaches a critical threshold. A device harvesting this weak, but continous energy source, could work indefinatly?
Telecom satellites in geostationary orbit will be up there on a geological time scale. Humankind could knock itself down to a pre bronze age level of technology and rediscover spaceflight long before the orbits of any of them decay into the atmosphere.
If they were travelling in a straight linear track across the Milky Way, they'd be about 275 thousand light years from Earth, or somewhat further from us than the Milky Way is across (150k - 200k light years). Current speed of Voyager 2 relative to Earth is 5.4 * 10^8 km/yr, a half-billion km/yr, or 0.05 millilightyears/yr.
In truth, they'll be orbiting the galactic centre in an orbit somewhat offset from the Solar System. The Milky Way will have completed about 20 rotations. No idea what the resulting offset would be, but all but certainly somewhere within the galactic disk itself.
Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is.
> Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is.
I liked Neil deGrasse Tyson's description of how what we call space is still ridiculously close to our planet and how far away everything else actually is, using a standard classroom globe for scale: https://youtu.be/Tt0uV5d8tss?t=99
Actually, I believe they stand a decent chance of some future billionaire recovereing them and putting them into a museum or a private collection in a hundred years or so.
That writeup, while accurate, was back in 2013 before Starship / Super Heavy was a serious concept. And if everything pans out with it, we can get huge amounts of stuff up a lot cheaper. It even says that an ion drive (based on 2013 technology) will work, but we will have an issue with re-capture once it gets to Earth.
That can be solved with a much larger ion drive, which will be much cheaper to launch (along with appropriate amounts of propellant) using Starship (or its future successors). And if a wealthy individual that has everything wants to retrieve that golden record for his personal collection, and is willing to spend a couple billion on it, well I'm sure that Musk's great grandkid will be more than willing to oblige.
Interesting thank you. That's what my second question was going to be, if it could stop it and bring it back and how hard that might be. Seems the answer is- very hard.
Maybe it's power of simplicity. When I coded 8086 assembly program, it's less likely to have bugs. There are just a few registers to use, most things are next to bare metal. Like what could go wrong moving hex around if we know exactly what we are doing.
Yeah...the stuff we do in most industries today is so complex that if we used Assembly or even C, nothing would ever get done. The problem is the abstractions we need (OS, high level langs) create many additional layers of complexity that can fail and bite you.
I might have a rudimentary understanding of electronics and digital design and could write Assembly and kind of understand the full toolchain from A to Z, but on a modern computer (hardware, BIOS, OS, programming language...etc) there is no hope.
Everything is a trade-off. If I had to write code for a probe today I would opt for the absolute simplest hardware and software so there is a lot less room for error.
A lot of modern complexity is kind of incidental. We need to deal with GUIs, protocols, out of order execution, parallel and concurrent programming. The core of things didn't change that much, you store a bunch of things in memory, you sort then, you search things, you move them to disk storage, you retrieve them and so on.
If you wanted to run a factory floor and the machines in it just by using either assembly or C and our knowledge of a bunch of algorithms, it would probably work, but without all the advantages we leverage by modern technologies. Instead of "Select ProdOrders where....", considering we once have done a bunch of "create table" and "create index", we would have to manually define the disk structures layouts by hand, hand write sorting routines for each one. It would take armies of programmers, but a single iphone would suffice for all IT needs of a large multinational bank. The user interface would be terrible, you'll need speacialized operators for simply entering data on the system, or extracting results.
But in a space probe, you don't need to care about user interfaces, ever-changing business requirements, nice integration points, so you could probably get away with a very simple and primitive time-sharing os, in a single-threaded CPU, by using only C and a barebones standard library, dropping from time to time to inline assembly.
Actually it is an interesting imagination exercise. It makes me think that even if a catastrophic event happened like an EMP, we would probably be using computers again to help rebuild the world in less than 20 years. As long as we had people with the knowledge to deal with the basics.
IMHO, a much more reasonable approach would be to have a minimalistic bootloader running on a separate hardware with some kind of redundancy + a more or less regular system for the rest of the logic. If the cost of error is simply deploying a patch using a dedicated high-reliability channel, you don't need to suffer and restrict yourself to stone-age technology.
My heart is really on edge for the folks working on JWST. Decades of work perched atop a giant bomb to get into space, then it's like six months from T-0 on the launch pad to first science images. Errybody going to have ulcers.
They got Chuck Berry's Johnny B. Goode and Izlel je Delyo Hagdutin on it so at least they captured both America and the centuries-long ripple of enmity between various Eastern European Slavs and the Anatolians.
I think you're missing what the parent is saying: since the majority are poor, they plainly don't rule (since then they wouldn't remain poor). If democracy is defined as "majority rule," and we plainly see that the majority in the US do NOT rule, then the US is not a democracy.
I thought I would hate this article, having years of delivering software with and without estimates, and preferring the latter. But it makes a compelling case!
