I think with the right parental guidance/supervision this could be a very fun toy.
From the website it seems like a great way to generate some black and white outlines that kids can still color in. If used like that it seems almost strictly more creative than a coloring book, no? There are plenty of other ways kids can express creativity with pre-made art too. Maybe they use them to illustrate a story they dreamed up? Maybe they decorate something they built with them?
Also, some children might want to have fun be creative in ways that don't involve visual arts. I was never particularly interested in coloring or drawing and still believe myself to be a pretty creative individual. I don't think my parents buying me some stickers robbed me of any critical experience.
I agree with you, American schools seem particularly bad at breeding these sorts of unhealthy dynamics, and we shouldn't accept it as normal. But even in a better environment, unstructured social interaction with peers still seems like a useful part of growing up/socialization and shouldn't be replaced with kids sucked into their phones.
The beef isn't with systemd upstream which already has a very simple/boring workaround for this, it's with the debian package maintainer (some people here are wearing multiple hats).
Really the whole raison d'etre of debian is move at this pace to prioritize stability/compatibility. If you don't like that philosophy there are other distros but a package maintainer's primary job is to repackage software for that distro (which presumably users have chosen for a reason), not comply with upstream.
Agreed, this is a common division of labor and simplifies things. It's not entirely clear in the postmortem but I speculate that the conflation of duties (i.e. the enactor also being responsible for janitor duty of stale plans) might have been a contributing factor.
I would divide these as functions inside a monolithic executable. At most, emit the plan to a file on disk as a “—whatif” optional path.
Distributed systems with files as a communication medium are much more complex than programmers think with far more failure modes than they can imagine.
Doing it inside a single binary gets rid of some of the nice observability features you get "for free" by breaking it up and could complicate things quite a bit (more code paths, flags for running it in "don't make a plan use the last plan mode", flags for "use this human generated plan mode"). Very few things are a free lunch but I've used this pattern numerous times and quite like it. I ran a system that used a MIP model to do capacity planning and separating planning from executing a plan was very useful for us.
I think the communications piece depends on what other systems you have around you to build on, its unlikely this planner/executor is completely freestanding. Some companies have large distributed filesystems with well known/tested semantics, schedulers that launch jobs when files appear, they might have ~free access to a database with strict serializability where they can store a serialized version of the plan, etc.
If the only way I interact with a service is a single app then I want that app to blend into my phone. I don't care if the Uber app on Android and iOS are the same, I only see one of them. If I have to use a service on many different platforms, I sometimes prefer having a consistent design language, e.g. I like that Slack has a consistent sidebar interface everywhere. I want to go from the browser to tablet to phone and not have anything in a different spot.
As an example, parts of the C++ standard library (none of the core language I believe though) are covered by complexity requirements but implementations can still vary widely, e.g. std::sort needs to be linearithmic but someone could still implement a very slow version without it being UB (even if it was quadratic or something it still wouldn't be UB but wouldn't be standards conforming).
UB is really about the observable behavior of the abstract machine which is limited to the reads/writes to volatile data and I/O library calls [1]
I understand why Alexander Stepanov thought the complexity requirements were a good idea, but I am not convinced that in practice this delivers value. Worse, I don't see much sign C++ programmers care.
You mentioned particularly the C++ unstable sort std::sort. Famously although C++ 11 finally guarantees O(n log n) worst case complexity the libc++ stdlib didn't conform. They'd shipped worst case O(n squared) instead.
The bug report saying essentially "Hey, your sort is defective", was opened in 2014. By Orson Peters. It took until 2021 to fix it.
For those exact specs the Asus you linked seems like a great deal but it also looks like it has soldered ram which could limit the useful lifespan (the FW13 has two so-dimms and officially supports up to 96 GiB of ram but on forums people have been using the new 64 GiB dimms to get 128 GiB working fine).
The linked gigabyte seems like maybe a good deal as well but that's also not the Ryzen 9, it's a 7. Some people (mine included) also have strong opinions on the look/quality of the case and their preferences might lean more towards FW than the linked gigabyte's glowing green look.
From the website it seems like a great way to generate some black and white outlines that kids can still color in. If used like that it seems almost strictly more creative than a coloring book, no? There are plenty of other ways kids can express creativity with pre-made art too. Maybe they use them to illustrate a story they dreamed up? Maybe they decorate something they built with them?
Also, some children might want to have fun be creative in ways that don't involve visual arts. I was never particularly interested in coloring or drawing and still believe myself to be a pretty creative individual. I don't think my parents buying me some stickers robbed me of any critical experience.
reply