"If" is doing an enormous amount of work here.

> The best design is original, groundbreaking and often counterintuitive.

If you want to talk in absolutes, I'd say the best design is the one that results in the desired behaviour of your audience.

I unwatched the repo yesterday, but that has had no effect. Also changed my notifications email, also no effect.

I have the emails going straight to trash.

35k emails so far, deleted about 10k yesterday.

My inbox is functional so it’s not a big deal, but it’s surprising this activity is not caught by a spam filter or something.

~45k emails (so far) to one email? Totally normal human activity according to GitHub.

I think changing his name to Richard Lambo may not have avoided this outcome.

There are a few scans on Instagram, I'd charitably describe them as "dogshit".

Ah, so bad. I got excited for a second.

Please do break down the differences.

I could not hold myself back, so I already elaborated on OpenBSD and DragonflyBSD here (albeit it is non-exhaustive): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45714491 :D

I left out FreeBSD from that comment, which has its own set of innovations: Capsicum (capability-based security framework), Jails (OS-level virtualization/containerization which predates Docker by over a decade), MAC Framework (Mandatory Access Control for fine-grained security policies), GEOM (modular disk I/O framework), Linuxulator (Linux binary compatibility layer), ZFS (FreeBSD has arguably the best ZFS implementation outside of Solaris), bhyve (type-2 hypervisor), and so forth.

Userland tools include iocage/bastille (jail managers), poudriere (package building), jemalloc (default allocator which focuses on fragmentation avoidance and scalability) among many others.

Each BSD really does have its own character. FreeBSD leans toward performance and production use, OpenBSD toward security and correctness, NetBSD toward portability and clean design, DragonflyBSD toward alternative SMP approaches!

(illumos/OpenIndiana is quite interesting, too (see DTrace, Doors IPC, Zones, SMF, Contracts, Event Ports, RBAC)).

FreeBSD uses OpenZFS (which was previously called ZoL (ZFSOnLinux), afaik) -- so it's the same implementation as e.g ubuntu.

OpenZFS was not previously called ZoL. It was one implementation that later merged into the OpenZFS project.

And sure, technically both FreeBSD and Ubuntu use OpenZFS codebase now, but FreeBSD has in-tree, native kernel integration, whereas Linux has DKMS modules that are separate from mainline kernel, AND FreeBSD had ZFS since 2007 (18 years) and is considered more mature, whereas Linux's stable ZFS is much newer.

Additionally, some features work better on FreeBSD, Boot-on-ZFS is more polished on FreeBSD, and there are performance differences, too.

So my original claim is fine, though illumos is probably the actual best which is technically not Solaris anymore (even though it comes from OpenSolaris)... but as with always, you need history. Follow the timeline. :P

> why has the title been editorialized

Indeed, the HN guidelines:

> please use the original title, unless it is misleading or linkbait; don't editorialize

By "editorialize" we mean changing a title to introduce spin, or cherry-picking one detail to bias the reader in the direction that the submitter personally wants, rather than reflecting the article as a whole (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45202136 for a recent comment about that).

In this case, that wasn't at issue. The operative clause is "unless it is misleading or linkbait". A word like "extorted" is too baity for HN's frontpage. This is nothing personal against the OP! It's actually better for them and for Hack Club if the HN title is relatively neutral while still conveying the critical information.

They're also saying that they don't understand that writing code costs businesses money.

The point of the documentary was to show that Vermeer may have used optics.

That's it.

There are large swathes of earth that are too inhospitable, like deserts. They're more accessible and easier to support life in than Mars, and yet no one lives there.

The deserts even have breathable air.

But there are people living in the inhospitable deserts that have useful resources like oil. Or artificial resources like legalized gambling.

Antarctica is even more inhospitable than deserts, and there are people living there for research purposes.

I'm just making the basic point that we have a wealth of much more hospitable places to live on earth, and somehow they're not viable candidates as "backup plans" for humanity.

Going a little further, living in the ocean is easier than living on Mars. As far as I can tell there are no billionaire-funded submarine civilisation programs.

They're not viable candidates as backup plans for humanity because they have the same vulnerabilities to comet strikes, global nuclear war and pandemic as the rest of the Earth.

OTOH, if one of those took out human life on Earth, people living on Mars could re-colonize Earth.

Earth after a global nuclear war or comet strike is still more hospitable than Mars.

It's hard to imagine anything that would make Mars a better place to live than simply staying on earth.

Yes it would be. But that doesn't matter if no humans make it through the apocalypse in the first place.

The moon would do the job at a lot cheaper price.

Nope. Because of aero braking, Mars takes less delta v to get to and land on than the moon does.

Now I'm wondering why the Apollo program went to the moon if doing Mars is so much cheaper.

Going is cheaper. Coming back is more expensive. And of course the 3-6 month travel time is a challenge.

I will say the compelling thing about Mars is that you wouldn't be disrupting an ecosystem to terraform it.

That said, I'm definitely on the side of making Fresno a paradise before we try mars.

I know what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, but really? We're going this far with it? It doesn't even exist anymore?