I mean it’s early to tell, but so far it is reported that those were precise attacks towards military targets. So if that’s true, that would explain that attitude from ordinary Iranians.

The thing with “pager terrorism” is that it was genius in targeting just the terrorists. The supply chain of the terrorist organization was hijacked, and even then no one normal uses pagers today.

Thy don’t share border so one can’t invade each other, they can only fly missiles and rockets between each other.

Here’s one video talking about it: https://youtu.be/NdPjS3EvcFU

There videos of actual expressions which were spectacular.

The biggest one registered as 2.8 rather on Richter scale

Ukrainians destroyed it just as the ammunition from North Korea arrived.

Edit: here’s the video of the explosion https://youtu.be/igdgA-LHZHU

LOL, that ammunition dump explosion must have really burned him.

Three streaming (like pointed in the other comment) was my initial reaction too, but indeed at the time https for streaming would be very rare.

Another possibility is to realize that openssl isn’t just for communication, but also has implementation of cryptographic algorithms.

Perhaps openssl was used for validation of licensing key? For example they could sign the license with their private key and WinAmp could verify it’s authenticity with its public key.

Given that he destroyed the vase to gain popularity, wouldn’t be possible that this is another stunt to make people talk about him?

Notice that his name is even in the headline.

996 = working from 9am to 9pm, 6 days a week, work schedule practiced currently in many companies in China

7-10-7 = I’m guessing 7am to 10pm, 7 days a week because of worker shortage?

LOL, … and it also wouldn’t break as easily!

Yeah, we (the West) screwed up big time. If Ukraine got full help in 2022, this war likely would be over the same year. Russia was very disorganized in initial invasion, and Ukraine only needed a bigger kick to push them back all the way.

At Ralph’s 12 cage free large eggs cost $3.99

Free range (the most expensive if you are conscious about chicken treatment) large eggs are for $7.49

No one tells me I just haven’t had the right banana yet when I tell them I don’t like bananas.

Well, maybe not banana, but I suppose someone could make that argument about an Apple, there are so many different kinds.

Yeah, in that video he showed how those rich fucks are so disconnected from reality.

Wait, you don’t have a thumbs down button on YouTube?

I mean statistics. Now it makes it easier to simply ignore it and promote video to others despite it being unpopular (for example conspiracies).

No, you see… They thought they were beneficiaries, but since trump is not doing so hot, they are not sure right now.

Don’t let the perfect be the enemy of good.

Wouldn’t you be able to say the same thing about Facebook and Twitter?

The issue with those networks is that they don’t react to reports. They also don’t allow to downvote.

It is especially visible with YouTube which had downvoting from the start and decided to remove it despite user protests.

They are tuned to promote controversial topics, which disinformation thrives with.

It does. it does to this. That’s the docker image not the docker file. You are confusing the spec with the artifact. If you want reproducible dev envs you use a system like compose or any rad of other tools to launch images from your artifact store.

You use them, make sure they are always pristine and cleaned after use, don’t have network connectivity and other things that could affect the build.

Or you could use Nix which builds everything this way.

Notice that you mentioned additional systems to achieve that, you wouldn’t need them if docker was truly providing it.

LOL. We always have this problem if you have people only using spec files and not the artifacts. You are comparing apples to oranges by comparing the dockerfile to a build rpm package. Let me help you:

An rpm package == docker image
An rpm .spec file == dockerfile

You if you only give people spec files and have them rebuild the package you will get different hashes of the rpm file. Similarly you would likely not change your spec file between releases and know your rpm file is going to be different.

But that’s the whole point. A developer wants spec file to ALWAYS generate the same artifact. And most devs even believe that and get frustrated when it doesn’t (like in your example).

Nix basically solves that. It even removes the need for tools like artifactory, because there’s no longer need for it. The code fully defines the final binary. Of course you don’t want to rebuild everything every time, so a cache is introduced.

Before you say that it is just renaming artifactory. It really isn’t. It actually works like a cache. I can remove any piece of it, and the missing pieces will be rebuild if they are needed. It is also used by the builder, so it doesn’t repeat itself. I especially like it when working on feature branch and it completes the code. I eventually merge it, and if my merge did not modify code it won’t waste time rebuilding the same thing.

I see that too. Despite what most people say they aren’t truly interested in learning new things (at least things that would force them out of their comfort zones).

I mean if team tries to move out then there’s not much one can do.

Maybe they can look into using some tooling that whole isn’t nix, it uses nix under the hood and still prices some benefits.

I heard about DevBox and Flox. Those at least try to provide a reproducible dev environment (note, I haven’t used them myself as I feel that the abstraction they do places limits on nix functionality, but then others might see it as a benefit)

I also am getting impression that as time progresses things are getting smoother over time. With poetry2nix for example the big problem are packages that depend on C libraries, as those are not specified as python dependencies, so poetry2nix has a override file which adds them.

Previously I very frequently had to update and contribute new packages there. I was a bit away from python as was assigned to work on a Go project for half a year and now starting to work on another python project and when tried to use it and things just worked. All I had to do was to use latest poetry2nix and my project then compiled to a working container.

The dockerfile does not guarantee this, but the docker image or any OCI image does.

That’s true, but also misleading.

OCI image is like having an jpeg image. While Dockerfile is like the text prompt you write to ChatGPT to generate the image.

Yes every time you look at the jpeg, it is the same exact image, but that’s kind of obvious, the real problem is if you try the text query to ChatGPT you will get something slightly different every time.

Nix brings a true reproducibility. So in this analogy the same prompt brings the exact same image. This allows you to check on that prompt in your source control and if you mess up something there’s always a way back.

This is something docker promised, but never delivered.

Dockerfile should not be confused with the artifact.

It should not, but artifacts never had problem with mutating before we had docker. If you generate an rpm package and store it in an artifactory it always was the same exact package (unless someone overwrote it, lol)

Operationally we usually expect a dockerfile to be identical across many builds of different releases and know the artifact produced will have different code

But that’s basically the problem docker claimed to fix. This is also the problem that you frequently encounter with a pipeline that worked fine one day suddenly stopped working next day, because something that your Dockerfile referenced changed (maybe a new image was updated that broke something, you can lock things to specific hashes, but you need to be very conscious about that and in the wild I never seen anyone really doing it).

Anything you are doing with nix to make the lock files perfect is the same amount of work you’d be doing to any method of producing an OCI artifact.

It is not. Hashes are and lock files are built-in and Nix uses them by default.

If for example I use a flake, the flake.lock will hold the exact version of nixpkgs (package repo) in time. That happens without any additional effort. The poetry2nix converts poetry.lock file to nix packages that are once again locked in time, and that also happens behind the scenes.

The result is that all dependencies (python dependencies - from poetry.lock as well as the rest of the system (python, c libraries etc) - from flake.lock are all locked and in my repo. So everything is repeatable without effort on my side.

To repeat that with Dockerfile is much more challenging.

I do think your approach is interesting though. Certainly less effort than manually packing an OCI with something like buildpaks or trying to run through bazel to get your way through a distroless build (two other methods that don’t make massive images with a Debian base). And obviously ‘From:scratch’ in docker build land is a nightmare.

If you get your app build with Nix. The whole thing, including all of app’s dependencies are explicitly referenced so you can wrap it into a docker, an rpm file, OS image etc.

It’s controversial, but IMO nix is actually easier than what we are doing now. I think the problem is that it is a massive paradigm shift and what most people know what to do with existing technologies will generally be not useful, so you have to relearn everything.

But IMO it pays off. For example when starting a new project I can package the whole thing in 5 minutes. poetry2nix translates the project and it’s dependencies into nix packages and then since nix understands dependencies for my project it can package it automatically.