Ax102-u

People seem to set their money on fire?

Not people! Just enterprises that want scalability.

Ive always suspected that this is all of a tax dodge, a money spinner, and a pr exercise "we gave xxx to charity" - no, your customers did.

Just set up a direct debit to your favourite charity.

> Just

the point of these drives is to get more people to give to charity. Then you use a lullaby-word as if setting up a charitable donation is as easy as saying "yes" when the checker asks if you want to give a small donation.

Well, my point was that maybe it actually isnt "to get more people to give to charity", maybe its actually something else.

Its actually very easy to give £5/month direct to a charity. Takes about 2 minutes, just gotta do it.

You're overthinking this. There's a publicity element to it, but the money just gets given to charity, like they say it does. It's not a conspiracy or a tax accounting trick.

How can you tell? And is this definitely universally true or just true of the 1 instance you happen to have personal experience with?

Same way I can tell that my next door neighbor isn't poisoning my water supply or that Tesco doesn't have a secret chemical weapons program. That major supermarket chains are running scam charity appeals just isn't a hypothesis worth entertaining in the absence of any evidence for it.

Because the risk of fraud is too great for major corporations. They have accountants and businesses people who would report it.

The risk with charity money is not the companies collecting a few cents but the charity itself.

Agree - I don't think a giant multinational should get the cumulative charitable donation through their "Gavin Belson Foundation", and frankly it coming while you're checking yourself out, and navigating all dark-pattern "share your email for an e-receipt?", "want our deal of the day?", "enter your loyalty card?", "fill out this poll?", "are you collectioning stickers?" nonsense really grinds my gears. I just want cheaper groceries!

ah, thanks for introducing me to this business model! :-)

Yup, this works so nice.

Using traefik or caddy as proxy.

Docker context for remote access - over Internet or vpn, whatever.

Swarm-cronjob for scheduled things.

Labels for things that need to run in particular places.

So easy.

Personally, k8s is fine, but its an abstraction for building a service architecture, not the thing an end user (developer) should ever use. If you are in a big company and you are using helm or k8s yaml files to roll things out, your infra or platform teams have missed something out.. building the platform!

Website was too long.

ScrumMaster - a qualification you cannot fail. (Pls pay fee)

Ultimately big company look for things to help them sort their terrible product and software processes.

The whole point of agile, its that you don't know!

If you are SaFE, or 4 week sprints.. you are in management imposed bs.

Your company is a about to be eaten.

I mean, sure.

But what about allowing user inputs in trusted fields,

Or allowing switching environments per request, on inputs from users

Or allowing requests in a user context to access storage from another

Or storing everything in plaintext on a node that everything can access

Or not validating user inputs

Or...

Its not a success story.

Float to Live

https://rnli.org/safety/know-the-risks/cold-water-shock

No mention of JVM.. which is a bit odd as recently is kinda solved this problem. Sure, not all use cases, but a lot.

It uses N:M threading model - where N virtual threads are mapped to M system threads and its all hidden away from you.

All the other languages just leak their abstractions to you, java quietly doesn't.

Sure, java is kinda ugly language, you can use a different JVM language, all good.

Don't get me wrong, love python, rust, dart etc, but JVM is nice for this.

Solved assuming you can afford a huge embedded-unfriendly runtime.

It is mentioned

Ah yeah, you are right. It was easy to miss, as it was ~30 words in a massive article.

Super interesting article.

Didn't operate for long? 1984-1995 - its long enough. Still remember seeing those scrambled programs in France.

At the time in UK, lets say 87-92, the concept of paid tv over the air was incredible. Satellite existed, but wasn't very prevalent.

Carbon offsetting is a nonsense.

Any company that uses it, is doing nothing other than buying a grant to pollute.

"Buying grants to pollute" is literally how cap-and-trade systems work, and they've been extremely effective at reducing pollution. We don't hear about "acid rain" anymore because of cap-and-trade of sulfur dioxide.

But we don't really have cap-and-trade for carbon, so the next best thing is public pressure to be net-zero rather than literally zero.

> We don't hear about "acid rain" anymore

Because of the de-industrialization of the West.

More because we switched away from coal, and what coal we still use we pre-process to remove the sulfur.

a cap-and-trade system is just a tax but more complicated and less predictable

I agree with the second sentence but I don't see how it implies the first. "Leave no trace" is a principle of outdoor recreation, not the fundamental meaning of life, and generating greenhouse gases is often necessary to produce goods and services people enjoy.

So hard to read that article, with all the pop ups, scroll hijacks, and back button grabbing (soon to be illegal)

Why do they try to hide actual content with hateful tech?

Anyhow, no way I would give that company money.