We've given up on native Windows containers in OCaml after trying to use them for our CI builds for many years. See https://www.tunbury.org/2026/02/19/obuilder-hcs/ for our recent switch to HCS instead. Compared to Linux containers, they're very much a second-class citizen in the Microsoft worldview of Docker.
This is because your team doesn’t know how to ship software without using containers.
If you have adopted a bad tool then people are likely to want the bad tool in more places. This is the opposite of a virtuous cycle and is a horrible form of tech debt.
I hate to see this. I bought a Sangean AM/FM/Weather radio with NOAA All Hazards alerting a little while back (I've been extremely happy with it) and as I was programming it wondered how long until either a group like DOGE, or private interest who wanted to repurpose these radio bands would cause such a wonderful service to go away. Maybe I'm naive but I'm surprised it happened in Canada before it happened here in the U.S.
They already went at NOAA with cuts and firings. If there's no national weather service there'll be nothing to broadcast (and less data on climate change)
Yeah, super disappointing. Not only do many of my amateur radio transceivers tune to the weather FM frequencies, I just picked up a cheap low-power receiver for the purpose of having something that can last a long time during extended power outages, if necessary -- with the idea of being able to keep up with local radio and weather radio during those times. I assumed Canada of all places will keep these kind of services going indefinitely, because they are pretty important when all else fails.
> It's almost as if, once you get to a certain level of power, you no longer need to try.
Correct. I think it's also a bit of a shibboleth now, like not wearing a suit. In former days the lower ranked employees wore jeans, t-shirts, hoodies, etc. and the bosses all wore suits and ties. Now it's the opposite at least in tech. If you see someone in "business" attire, you know they're middle management or sales and have no power, where if someone is in a tshirt and jeans they're probably a founder or executive. It's a flex to dress casual.
> Now it's the opposite at least in tech. If you see someone in "business" attire, you know they're middle management or sales and have no power, where if someone is in a tshirt and jeans they're probably a founder or executive. It's a flex to dress casual.
Eh? I've been working in tech for over 20 years. For all of that time, most people wore casual clothes.
If you live in America, are banking with an American bank, and hold your investments denominated in dollars I'm not sure that just shifting your investments to other global equities would really get you the outcome you want if your goal is to hedge against this specific risk. Besides if this really is the trade war to end all trade wars, the world losing one of the largest markets (the U.S.) is going to depress the entire global economy. I assume if you're even considering VXUS you're not close to retirement so wouldn't the better strategy be to just keep adding to VOO?
I believe that TD's US presence is still a subsidiary of the main Canadian corporation - and there are some banks that will explicitly offer offshore non-US currency accounts. That is a good point to raise though since most banks may offer holdings in overseas funds but if they're managed domestically they'd likely be subject to the same currency shocks and your account may still read well on paper but be effectively unreachable.
I am retired but I have not sold all my stocks and moved to bonds. Even if you use the "rule of 100" I should still have around 40% of my portfolio in stocks.
But to your point, I am certain that I am not going to profit from this fuckery. (Although, hilariously I bought silver a decade ago to teach my daughters about investing—and they each purchased a once or two from me. Of course it turned out to be a local maxima and they grow up, went to college—watching their investment sink all the while. Perhaps they did learn a valuable lesson in investing.)
No, I'm just doing damage control.
I had asked a month or so back as to where the "safe harbors" were during the Great Depression. My impression (and the responses did nothing to contradict this) were that there were no safe harbors—as perhaps there may not be any in some dystopian future we may or may not be headed for.
"Hold, don't sell during the panic," is all anyone could offer. (And so too holding those silver coins until now might also have been a valuable lesson for my daughters?)
> where the "safe harbors" were during the Great Depression [...] were that there were no safe harbors
Surely economy and the world economy operates in a completely different way now than it did back them, if not in the US, the very least in the rest of the world? But that's just my intuition, maybe things are more similar than they are different in reality?
> Of course it turned out to be a local maxima
Not to pour salt into your wounds (sorry), suppose your daughters were born 1980-1990 sometime, you really managed to hit exactly the stagnation phase it seems, that sucks but probably true what you say, still had a lesson in there :) I got curious and maybe others are too, especially if you don't usually look at price of commodities so here: https://www.macrotrends.net/1470/historical-silver-prices-10...
:| I was thinking "Yeah, 1980 probably, then they'd be 20 now, it'd match with the college stuff" and then I thought you were joking with 2011 but yeah, terrible for the same reason :/
At least during the Great Depression you had independent markets like the USSR. Good luck investing, though. :-) The point about the higher independence of markets still stands. Great Depression was named as such by Americans (just like World Series, etc), but wasn't as global as the name implies.
Nowadays the world's economy operates in even more globalized way and when the biggest players get hit, everyone suffers (1998, dotcom, 2008, covid). That's why the tariff war was such a counter-productive idea; even if you theoretically end up on top, everyone will still lose, including you.
In the Air France flight 11 [0] situation the pilots thought they were having instrument and control issues, they had to go around, and there was much panic in the cockpit. It turned out the entire thing was pilot induced and the aircraft was fine. Because of Boeing's massive failures on the minds of everyone it'll be interesting to see if this was truly an instrumentation failure or something else.
If you read the final incident report[1] from BEA, you'll see that there was a hardware failure - the control yokes got desynchronised from one another which isn't supposed to happen, and the pilots were therefore unaware of conflicting inputs. Worst of all, Boeing doesn't warn in any way if that happens, because why would they? Airbuses (which don't have synchronised sticks) have "dual input" warnings audio and visual warnings.
They should have communicated better, but we've seen this many times - in panic situations or under pressure, communication is hard.
Ah, since I see the peanut gallery needs some education.
the control yokes got desynchronised from one another which isn't supposed to happen
No, that's precisely what's supposed to happen. Seriously. On an Airbus with sidesticks opposing inputs get you a dual input warning and have a button to lock out the other set of controls, and the computers just average the inputs. On a Boeing with yokes (e.g. the 777 in question) the way you overcome opposing inputs is simply to pull harder. Past a certain point (I want to say about 50 lb of force), the torque tube linking the controls "breaks" and the controls are desynchronized. If memory serves that means each pilot gets control of the elevator on one side.
Worst of all, Boeing doesn't warn in any way if that happens, because why would they?
This is also wildly inaccurate. The yokes are mechanically connected up until you apply enough force to break the connection. The feedback you get as a result serves as a warning. Airbus uses the aural and visual warnings because their sidesticks aren't backfed and you'd otherwise have no idea what the other pilot is doing.
There was no hardware failure. Air France simply trains their pilots to a very low standard compared to other airlines.
Breaking it down into smaller parts with stable interfaces would allow a fork to only touch what it needs to while being able to take the rest as-is. Of course, that would also have significant costs with it; there's a reason Linux doesn't have a stable ABI or API for modules, nor support out of tree changes.
The 914 in the picture looks like a 1970 or 1971 so since it's over 50 years old it looks like it wouldn't be inspected anymore. [0]
A lot of states in the US also require safety inspections (including North Carolina where the author teaches) but often make exceptions for antique cars.
Interesting. It seems to be possible to skip the check for vehicles worthy of preservation. It requires the vehicle to not be modified (original design), which seems to be the case there, but also the safety equipment must function satisfactorily, which may be up for debate there.
> are in virtually original design
> Devices/equipment that are important for safety must function satisfactorily
> Must only be used
- on special occasions such as motor history gatherings and races
- otherwise occasionally when the use does not cause undue danger or inconvenience to other traffic.
> You would be forced to fix the car, or sell it to someone who will fix it, or remove the plates and deregister it, or scrap it. If you don’t do anything the police will remove the plates.
> I would advice fixing the car or selling it to someone who will fix it because it has some value.
Your comments were quite confident when you weren't actually familiar with the basics of the topic. Most countries have relaxed road worthiness tests or complete exemptions for classic cars, and I think this stands to reason.
> Most countries have relaxed road worthiness tests or complete exemptions for classic cars
I doubt the exception extends to having non-functional brakes.
The exception is from things like inspections and compliance with modern standards, but you still have a duty to maintain your vehicle to its original level of safety.
Indeed I as wrong as I wasn’t aware about the exception for old worth preserving vehicles. If I was the king I wouldn’t allow old death traps to drive on open roads but I guess it makes sense to some.
Plenty of new vehicles are a danger to others, and quite possibly far more so than an old 914. The driver of a 914 is probably going to be pretty careful about damaging it and will drive it prudently as a result, it also weighs (much) less than a modern vehicle and as a consequence will do less damage. Lack of built in safety and mid engine (so no engine between you and your partner in a collision, coupled with a nice hammer behind you that will use the other car in that accident you're in as the anvil and you as the workpiece) will be yet another reason why an owner will be careful about the situations they put themselves in. They'll likely do fewer km per year in than they would in a modern car.
As a cyclist I'd rather encounter someone in their classic 914 than the local lawn service jockey in his Dodge RAM flooring it at every corner.
Especially new “Eco Friendly” cars like the 7,000lb Rivian which, if it hits another car, is going to completely obliterate it and kill any occupants inside.
People with vintage cars like that generally take care of them, so it's a very low risk.
Same with motorcycles (also doesn't need regular inspections in Norway) - the riders generally have a very good reason to keep them safe for their own wellbeing.
As someone who owns a 1970 car and several motorcycles from the 70's, I would say that this is not true in the US. If you're imagining a wealthy guy with a spotless garage that pays top dollar to keep his antiques maintained in excellent condition, then you're thinking of the minority of antique vehicle owners. I bought my car for $14k and it would cost more than that to restore it (which I don't have). I do my best to keep it in acceptable roadworthy condition, but I also frequently test drive it around the neighborhood knowing full well something isn't working properly.
In my state, vehicles registered as antiques are not required to have the annual safety inspection performed, and it is the owner's responsibility to keep the vehicle in safe operating condition, which is never checked by anyone.
In California there are about five different classic car rallies. Fifty to a hundred people in pre 1975 cars get out on curvy roads and drive around for a few days.
No inspections, no smog tests. No shiny paint. Cars are for driving so drive them. There are mechanical problems and there’s joy in that, breaking down and fixing things, stopping to help/heckle.
The cars could be more safe, but we’re all mechanics by necessity. Failure also reminds us that these are all human made systems. Each can fail. Each can be fixed. In some ways being aware of the systems that make a car go (and stop) and being aware of the failure modes makes the classic car drivers more safe than their counterparts in driving appliances.
> I also frequently test drive it around the neighborhood knowing full well something isn't working properly.
That's wildly irresponsible of you. How will you look yourself in the eye if you cause an accident like that? If you can't afford to keep a car maintained you can't afford it, period.
I think if you read it like that, sure it may sound irresponsible.
But in reality it'll look a lot more innocent than that, and I am sure that OP does it carefully enough.
You just gotta make sure the brakes work and that you don't do any silly things. Doing test rides and listening for sounds etc is key to figuring out what's wrong and what to improve next.
Right now the thing that isn’t working properly is the oxygen sensor, so the engine struggles to rev past 3000rpm. I don’t worry much about the potential danger that puts others in.
Air mass sensor failure can often be determined by unplugging the thing completely, O2 sensor failure could be the cause of your problem but if it only starts to fail at very high revs I'd check the fuel system first to make sure that there is enough flow.
Those can get clogged up pretty badly, especially in vehicles that have been standing for a while with ethanol based fuel in them, it takes forever before that gunk clears out without some work, if at all.
If it really is the O2 sensor (of which you usually have two) then I'd suspect the pre-cat one first, it runs in a much hotter environment and is more critical to the engine working properly.
Another option is the crank sensor, they may not give enough signal at a high number of revs so you start to miss if enough pulses fail (one or two in an otherwise consistent signal isn't going to cause the PLL to lose lock but if it is more erratic then it will and then revs would drop back to a regime where the sensor is still working reliably).
reply