Forgot your password?
typodupeerror

Comment: Re:1024-fold (Score 4, Insightful) 207

by visualight (#47896969) Attached to: SanDisk Releases 512GB SD Card

I have an irrational desire to slap the people who thought inventing GiB was a good idea. I hope it's forgotten eventually. All the justifications for it were (and still are) bullshit -everyone knew what HD vendors were doing and no one who mattered was confused. That's still true , but now I have to explain to people that no, it's not a speech impediment...

Comment: Re:No one cares enough to build a competitor. (Score 1) 47

by visualight (#47845681) Attached to: Should Docker Move To a Non-Profit Foundation?

AC, your inability to see below the surface abstraction layers is your defining characteristic.

Portable deployment across machines. -- LXC templates accomplish this quite nicely, Docker is not needed.

Application-centric. -- "Minimal image" vs "Strictly what's needed by the app" saves 1 or 2 hundred MB? Don't care.

Automatic build. -- Anyone is free to use a state machine with LXC.

Versioning. -- State machine + Git!

Component re-use. -- You can cache with plain old LXC as well. Woot!

Sharing. -- Put your template in GitHub Yay!

Total Ecosystem. -- Don't need Docker to use any of those tools...

Comment: No one cares enough to build a competitor. (Score 4, Informative) 47

by visualight (#47843425) Attached to: Should Docker Move To a Non-Profit Foundation?

Hype Shmype...

LXC is the core technology, and the part that's actually revolutionary (for linux). Docker is a cool, well thought out, popular, easy-to-use (etc. ad nauseum) front end to LXC. Yes, I know there some interesting features, but I remain unimpressed. It's still a FRONT END to containers. Honestly I don't know why there aren't several competing front-ends like what happened with cd burning software. Maybe because the people competent to make one just don't care -they are still using LXC directly. It -is- drop dead simple.

I know I for one don't want application containers anyway, what's it save me a few hundred MB of disk space? Whatever, I'm still using LXC extensively every day, and I still haven't gone past the front page of Dockers website.

Comment: Re:why the focus on gender balance? (Score 1) 579

by visualight (#47787755) Attached to: Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia

I think the content of articles should not be helped or harmed overall, presuming editors are following policies. And while one could make an argument over which articles exist, I'm not sure there is a compelling argument beyond simple intuition. I mean, I haven't seen a man in HR in a decade, but I wouldn't dream of suggesting HR policies are tilted in any way. Just because the entire department is female doesn't mean they can't be equally concerned with male issues right? I'm not being sarcastic, I've met exactly one woman in HR that I thought had an ax to grind. Can't men be capable of the same impartiality?

I think my opinion on this is 'who cares? good policies and professionalism matter, but gender is irrelevant.'

Comment: Re:why the focus on gender balance? (Score 1) 579

by visualight (#47787605) Attached to: Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia

Hmm. Not seeing where you can claim I 'made shit up' without highlighting your own claim of intellectual superiority. Oh wait, were you referring to the obvious sarcastic hyperbole?

Actually, I -am- intellectually superior to you, our differing opinions on the same situation is ample evidence of this fact. Don't go feeling attacked, check the tone in your original post and understand.

Comment: Re:why the focus on gender balance? (Score 1) 579

by visualight (#47783613) Attached to: Why Women Have No Time For Wikipedia

There is absolutely a particular reason they shouldn't, and it's visible to any intelligent person.

When gender balance becomes a politically correct requirement for every occupation or hobby outside of ditch digging, the intelligent person asks "What the Fuck?", while folks like you just jump on the bandwagon and perpetuate ignorance and bias.

Fool.

Comment: Re:Development cycle (Score 2) 232

by visualight (#47771179) Attached to: How Red Hat Can Recapture Developer Interest

"As far as developers go, In the Ruby, Python, and Node ecosystems, anything that's not the latest doesn't exist. They don't use the system package management, they use gem, pip, and npm. They really don't care about the underlying OS, until it gets in the way, and getting in the way is exactly what a decade-old OS does."

^^These developers are idiots and don't deserve support.^^

Yeah, I'm aware of everything wrong with that statement, but it's a perspective that's valid for a lot of people. This culture evolved from a flood of Windows refugees that didn't even *try* to work with distributions, or, even worse built a business model that depended on and promoted circumventing it. ( *.io ).

Fuck them, because most of the time they *don't* actually have a compelling technical reason to be on the bleeding edge of project X, they just *start* there to begin with, and spend 0 seconds looking at distro tools. Yeah , I'm looking at you RoR.

I go on working for the same reason a hen goes on laying eggs. -- H.L. Mencken

Working...