I also think we should be thinking more long-term. How understandable is the history when you're trying to figure out why something changed? I usually try to tell the story of what changes are being made rather than treating every clump of commits as a "PR" that's just going to be squashed together anyway. I think a lot of valuable information is lost by doing that. But I realize that that train has left the station for most, so I'll just shut up now.
+1 for SmartGit. It's much more intuitive and flexible than the JetBrains UI, which still inherits so much terminology and behavior from its "unified" view that includes being able to handle Perforce changelists. It's a bit of a mess and generally trips new users up more than it helps. If you're comfortable with it, then good for you but I've had a lot of students not being able to grok it really well.
I used to feel that way about JetBrains, but I don’t notice those abstractions anymore. IDK how much of it is the iterative changes they have made over the years vs me getting used to it.
For me it was Termination Shock that finally convinced me to stop reading his books. He just likes to write really long, repetitive and wildly overly detailed books. I was entertained by SevenEves and Reamde but I'm open to the possibility that I might very well react as I did to Termination Shock if I tried rereading them.
Edit: I've read and very much enjoyed a ton of Stephenson (Cryptonomicon, The Baroque Cycle, Anathem) but his recent stuff is tailing off for me. I don't know if it's me or him.
Ahh, I dont feel alone, thats nice. I didn't even know Termination Schock. But glancing over the wikipedia page for it, I immediately know this is definitely not my genre. Climate fiction, no thanks.
I agree. Though there is a counterpoint that a Russian host isn't going to respect a DMCA request. On the flipside it's a Russian replacement for Github that is based on Gogs, Gitea, or even Forgejo possibly. So yeah, YMMV.
It's not just you. My reading is that the flaw was toxic Java users made the developers feel so bad about the feature that they canceled it out of spite. I'm almost certain that's not what it was but that's the only information in there.
I think that there's something up with that page. There may be a pathological path when suitable GPU support is not available.
My machine slowed down tremendously, with a YouTube video in another tab pausing entirely until I managed to close the tab. I tried again with Task Manager open and saw a process named "System Interrupts" with 75% of the CPU before I choked off the tab again.
I agree there's something wonky with the page. My argument is different: A web page should not be able to take down the computer, no matter what. Web pages are untrusted; this is a DoS threat.
Really, it also shouldn't be able to choke the browser.