This advice is not better than random. It is actually much much worse. It is a pseudo-formalization of a chilling effect.
Actively preventing people from sharing their ideas or being exposed to different points of view is one of the ways that despots stay in power. Don't be part of the problem. The first amendment was the first one for a reason.
Profit margins on eurorack are pretty damn low. And you need a lot of knobs and jacks and plugs. Even a hall effect sensor may be out of the sweet spot for cost.
The physical interface is an intrinsic part of the design of any eurorack module, including artistic elements. If you actually use these, then you quickly tire of menu diving for simple options, and only modules that do very particular things make it worth the bother. For everything else, the layout must be accessible, memorable, understandable, and not too crowded. And it helps if the visual of the thing conjures up memories of how it sounds or what it does.
I host OSS images there, and I see no notice about how they will be affected. If they limit access to my published images, then it will be an issue. In that case the benefit and thus incentive for many of the projects which have made docker and docker hub pervasive goes away. Without that adoption, there would probably be no docker hub today.
This should help people understand a bit better why this feel a bit underhanded. The images are free, and I and many other OSS devs have used docker hub in partnership to provide access to software, often paying for the ability to publish there. In this case, any burden of extra cost was on the producer side.
Turning this into a way to "know" every user and extract some value from them is their prerogative, but it does not feel like it is good faith. It also feels a bit creepy in the sense of "the user is the product".
Most of the OSS projects I use seem to either have moved to the GitHub container registry or some other (smaller) equivalent. Some have even set up their own registries behind Cloudflare.
One of the first things I did was move to Quay.io which is unlimited everything for OSS projects. I was reaching a point where I had 1M+ pulls a month (I suspect some kind of DDoS, accidental or otherwise, for a project with just 1.7k stars) - and not having to even think about the bandwidth or anything was wonderful. It's nice to be supported by Red Hat which I generally consider more benevolent towards OSS as opposed to Docker Hub.
This has been the standard practice for all tech companies. Make it free to capture the market and snuff out all competition. Once they have secured the whole market then its time to start making money to pay back the millions they borrowed from VCs for decades
It’s like playing Plague Inc. (reverse version of Pandemic the board game where you play as the disease): to win, develop all possible methods of spreading first; only then develop symptoms, and do it fast before anyone has time to react
I find it surprising that people notice the part about symptoms[1], and despite this happening repeatedly we do relatively little against the part about spreading.
Part of it is perhaps by definition, “spreading” already assumes success. Still, I’d welcome some regulation; or at least awareness; e.g. a neologism for companies in that stage, growing at cost and only getting ready to develop symptoms.
Dockerhub isn't vetted either. Dockerhub is major compliance risk. Too many images of questionable maintenance status and sometimes questionable build. Aside from maybe some base images I wouldn't pull anything from there for enterprise use. (For toying/experimenting around slightly different)
One can't rely on library updates being done, thus one has to have a build chain form many images.
I feel that dockerhub no longer can be the steward for the default docker repo because of this and the limitations they previously have implemented. It is time for them to hand over the baton stick to someone else, or that the notion of a default repo is removed all together
They do have special provisions for OSS projects hosting their images on DH.
I don't know all the details, but you should be able to find it in the docs.
This essay might win an award for having the most words for the simplest point made. The genuflecting and synthesized history lesson that it's the first 3/4 of it was an entirely unnecessary diversion.
There is and always will be those who take earnest and reasonable ways of describing beliefs and behaviors and turn them into hyperbolic ad-hominem at both ends of the spectrum. If we are aware of it, and use common sense and a little bit of critical thinking, there will be less of this.
I was curious about this as perhaps a new approach to recipe-oriented bytecode injection. But the I looked at the project's (long) history and docs status.
It seems that the main contributor has tapered off this project over time, and more specifically hasn't been active since July. (Mumfrey, if you're out there, please tell us what's up)
I would say that the feature set is pretty powerful as is, and it shows in the earlier history (having worked with Mixins since before it was called Mixins). The history reaches further back than the first commit to having been developed for Mumfrey's own modloader (LiteLoader).
As someone else already replied, Mumfrey still practices private development and only pushes new code after his own extensive testing. He has long periods of "public" inactivity because code refactors and other changes can be delicate given the widespread usage of the library within the Minecraft modding ecosystem, and as such, he doesn't want the distraction that in-development can attract from said community.
IIRC, at least a few years ago, Mumfrey had a tendency to develop Mixin in private and only push the commit backlog for releases, leading to periods of time where no activity was publicly visible. (Also IIRC, this is part of the reason why the FabricMC fork exists.)
I was paid to do code analysis on medical systems coming up to Y2K. Yes, there were Y2K related bugs which would have munged patient data, including exam data and results. Yes, we analyzed every point in the code having anything to do with dates and fixed the issue. Yes, this needed to be done to avoid injury to people. It was a months long effort due to the size of the code base.
I went to see the film tonight. I went into the theater not knowing what to expect, but keeping an open mind since this was a "Kyle" film. Meh. It's goofy, mildly entertaining, and well, just like a film from before Y2K. But I somehow managed to enjoy it.
I find the overall assertion to be grasping at a counterpoint. Particularly,
1. The reference to "Medieval" labeling goes all the way back to the beginning when D&D overall was nothing but a seed and an experiment. Modern materials do not come with the same presumptive labeling.
2. There is good reason to not include all the trappings of life in any particular era, as the core of D&D is a set of rules, and all the settings are simply versions of content that work on top of it. There are many such settings and they decidedly do not come from the same time and place.
3. Many of the arguments take the form of "It's not ..." wherein the thing that is not explicitly medieval is also not explicitly not-medieval. For example, it's easy to consider the texture of towns and villages as we generally see them in D&D as operating within the tapestry of an explicitly medieval (as the author describes) environment, or within any variation thereof as desired by the DM. Similarly you could also say "D&D does not explain how to make ice cream accurately." It was never _seriously_ about being medieval nor seriously about making ice cream.
EMF becomes a fungible energy medium. Imagine storing energy in a field, just as we do with MRI machines, momentarily in the poles of motor windings, essentially anything inductive, or that operates as an electromagnet. Apart from dielectric losses and other environmental factors that are inescapable, the magnetic field becomes elastic like air [in] a balloon. The potential for this to modify energy consumption patterns is mind-boggling.
Actively preventing people from sharing their ideas or being exposed to different points of view is one of the ways that despots stay in power. Don't be part of the problem. The first amendment was the first one for a reason.