There’s an opportunity there to invent a homoerotic subplot and use it in a sequel to The Producers.

Springtime For Hitler II: Winter Is Coming

I feel like we’d see a lot more progress if these types of comments were higher up in the chain, instead of buried at the end of a conversation. I see a lot of ridiculing people for not knowing this stuff, a la: https://xkcd.com/1053/

I understand it’s the ignorant masses’ responsibilities to educate themselves. But like, we could all stand to make it easier on one another instead of jumping down each other’s throats all the time.

Also this isn’t directed at you in particular, just in general. I just liked your response, and I wish more people would give answers like this.

Containers are nice, but don’t really cover things like firewalls, network configuration, identity management, and a whole host of other things, the configuration of which varies between providers.

Darn

“It’s all just ideological masturbation, and boy is my right arm tired”

Exactly the same for me. That, coupled with the fact that once I start talking, I talk slow and carefully, often pausing to think about what I’m gonna say next, leads to a lot of frustrating conversations. It’s like, if you don’t care enough to hear what I have to say, why did you ask?

Is frequent rebasing something I should push for? A clean history is nice, but I’ve just won them over on feature branches… Is this something quick and easy that would improve our quality of life?

Realistically, in the short term, no. If neither you nor any of your team members are familiar with rebasing or rebase-based workflows, you will encounter problems that no one will know how to solve without researching. That’ll lead to frustration, and before you know it those old school teammates that don’t get git will fall back into using svn, or zip files with names like final_project_v1.2_final_final (copy)

I recommend getting familiar with rebase- and merge-based workflows on your own first, like on your own projects/private repos, and reading through the git documentation. Once you become more of an expert, you might be able to teach your teammates how to be proficient at using git, or at bare minimum, you’ll be able to help them unfuck themselves when they inevitably fuck their repos up.

Sounds like the onboarding process needs to have a step in it that says “here’s a link to a git tutorial, read this and get familiar with using git, as it’s an integral tool that you will use every single day on the job”. Bonus points for providing a sample repo that juniors can use to mess around with git, extra bonus points for including steps in the onboarding materials for the juniors to set up their own repos to play around with.

Yeah I’m definitely not a cryptography expert, but I’m more used to working with it in the “you need an authority to give relative meaning” use cases, not the “this signature came from that private key and that’s good enough” use cases. I feel like a lot of your examples rely on the “you need an authority to give relative meaning” use case though, and I can’t wrap my mind around a way to make that work in a way that that doesn’t largely negate the benefits you get from blockchain and it’s decentralization.

Sure, you could do that, but all that would prove is that a block was signed with the private key associated with the included public key. That doesn’t necessarily say anything about someone’s identity though does it? It just says they know how to generate a public/private key pair and a digital signature. Maybe I’m misunderstanding your example?

Sweet, genuinely thank you, my question came from a place of genuine curiosity and honest skepticism, so I appreciate the detail. I have a follow up question though. Most of those use cases seem like they’d require linking a specific identity to a given blockchain transaction. How does one go about doing that?

OP have empathy and assume other people not like touch dirty plate bottom, even if get paid for it, so goes out of way to not make plate bottom dirty

I see this kind of comment on pretty much every thread about Blockchain, and yet those commenters aren’t ever able to share a use case where Blockchain solves a problem better than the existing technology. Maybe you have one though?

When one dirty plate go on top of other dirty plate, bottom of plate get dirty too. OP no like making bottom of plate dirty, so no stack plate.

I like calling people inanimate objects. Being angrily called a “fucking waffle” or a “God damned acorn” hits different than the normal curses and slurs

Absolutely, definitely, totally, 100% incorrect. Just because I only provided one source does not mean that that’s the only source available claiming that Yaweh originated in a pantheon. To suggest that is laughably disingenuous, and more proof that you’re not approaching this discussion seriously or with honesty.

History isn’t replicable and observable like chemistry, physics or biology

Your close-minded definition of “history” isn’t, because it doesn’t allow you to update and believe new things based on new scientific discoveries and evidence. It’s stagnant, stuck in the past, rigid, and unwilling to change.

You’re either being obtuse or you don’t understand how science works if you think “he says it’s just a theory” is a gotcha

🤘😈🤘

Yeah see this is how I know you’re not serious. The author of that article isn’t “some guy”, he’s an incredibly respected and accomplished historian and archaeologist, specializing in ancient near-east civilizations. And you couldn’t be bothered to read past the first paragraph. You don’t want to have an actual discussion about this.

The entire thing is contradictory, on purpose, to give people excuses to commit atrocities in the name of their “kind and loving” God