Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote or quoted:
>Give them an idea and programmers are likely to go off into the wild blue
>yonder. “I wonder what would happen if we used AI for this problem?”

Some people, when confronted with a problem, think,
"I know, I'll use AI." Now they have two problems.

On 7 Oct 2024 18:43:25 GMT, rbowman wrote:

> I did one test app to simulate a paging interface using Tkinter. That
> was enough.

I have dabbled with tkinter, too. Trouble is, it doesn’t seem to provide
any convenient way to interface to asyncio: you have to keep periodically
calling some update() routine to ensure the GUI stays live.

In article <AI-20241007213048@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>,
Stefan Ram <ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de> wrote:
>Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote or quoted:
>>Give them an idea and programmers are likely to go off into the wild blue
>>yonder. “I wonder what would happen if we used AI for this problem?”
>
> Some people, when confronted with a problem, think,
> "I know, I'll use AI." Now they have two problems.
>

https://xkcd.com/1171/
--
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..

On 7 Oct 2024 20:31:01 GMT, Stefan Ram wrote:

> Some people, when confronted with a problem, think,
> "I know, I'll use AI." Now they have two problems.

Some people, faced with the problem of how to make a joke in an online
thread, think, “I know, I’ll paraphrase that hoary old Jamie Zawinski
quote, and figure out a way to make it funny”.

Now they have *two* problems.

On 7 Oct 2024 20:31:01 GMT
ram@zedat.fu-berlin.de (Stefan Ram) wrote:

> Peter Flass <peter_flass@yahoo.com> wrote or quoted:
> >Give them an idea and programmers are likely to go off into the wild blue
> >yonder. “I wonder what would happen if we used AI for this problem?”
>
> Some people, when confronted with a problem, think,
> "I know, I'll use AI." Now they have two problems.
>
You should know. Ya dig, Dude?

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

Joel wrote:
> fag.
>
> https://postimg.cc/QBM8bWCY
>
>
indeed

186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote at 03:07 this Friday (GMT):
> On 10/3/24 6:40 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:26 this Thursday (GMT):
>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 16:00:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 21:58 this Monday (GMT):
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I suspect PayPal and Ebay actually do still use COBOL somewhere
>>>>>
>>>>> Where would they have got it from? They were both entrepreneurial
>>>>> startups, offering an entirely new kind of financial/commercial service
>>>>> essentially from scratch.
>>>>
>>>> /Sometimes/ having an outdated system is beneficial (CloudFlare
>>>> disaster)
>>>
>>> Did COBOL have something to do with that?
>>
>>
>> Oh, I meant more the couple of companies that managed to keep running
>> stuff, like Southwest.
>
> Well ... sometimes an 'obsolete' language as the
> base of your operations - kinda like "Latin" - it
> doesn't really CHANGE anymore, No COBOL-2025 where
> they've changed half the stuff .......
>
> As such "obsolete" CAN equal "stability".

Like debian?
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

candycanearter07 wrote this post; take it under advisement:

> 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote at 03:07 this Friday (GMT):
>> On 10/3/24 6:40 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:26 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 16:00:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 21:58 this Monday (GMT):
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suspect PayPal and Ebay actually do still use COBOL somewhere
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Where would they have got it from? They were both entrepreneurial
>>>>>> startups, offering an entirely new kind of financial/commercial service
>>>>>> essentially from scratch.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Sometimes/ having an outdated system is beneficial (CloudFlare
>>>>> disaster)
>>>>
>>>> Did COBOL have something to do with that?
>>>
>>> Oh, I meant more the couple of companies that managed to keep running
>>> stuff, like Southwest.
>>
>> Well ... sometimes an 'obsolete' language as the
>> base of your operations - kinda like "Latin" - it
>> doesn't really CHANGE anymore, No COBOL-2025 where
>> they've changed half the stuff .......
>>
>> As such "obsolete" CAN equal "stability".
>
> Like debian?

Debian has 3 levels: stable, testing, and unstable (Sid).

Pick your poison. I used Sid for many years. Currently I use Testing,
which means sometimes my updates have to be delayed a few hours (as told by
the aptitude interfaces).

--
QOTD:
"A university faculty is 500 egotists with a common parking problem."

On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 16:36:07 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> Debian has 3 levels: stable, testing, and unstable (Sid).
>
> Pick your poison. I used Sid for many years. Currently I use Testing,
> which means sometimes my updates have to be delayed a few hours (as told
> by the aptitude interfaces).

I have Debian on my work Linux box. Stable is good for a production
machine.

On 09/10/2024 21:36, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> candycanearter07 wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>
>> 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote at 03:07 this Friday (GMT):
>>> On 10/3/24 6:40 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:26 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 16:00:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 21:58 this Monday (GMT):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suspect PayPal and Ebay actually do still use COBOL somewhere
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where would they have got it from? They were both entrepreneurial
>>>>>>> startups, offering an entirely new kind of financial/commercial service
>>>>>>> essentially from scratch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Sometimes/ having an outdated system is beneficial (CloudFlare
>>>>>> disaster)
>>>>>
>>>>> Did COBOL have something to do with that?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I meant more the couple of companies that managed to keep running
>>>> stuff, like Southwest.
>>>
>>> Well ... sometimes an 'obsolete' language as the
>>> base of your operations - kinda like "Latin" - it
>>> doesn't really CHANGE anymore, No COBOL-2025 where
>>> they've changed half the stuff .......
>>>
>>> As such "obsolete" CAN equal "stability".
>>
>> Like debian?
>
> Debian has 3 levels: stable, testing, and unstable (Sid).
>
> Pick your poison. I used Sid for many years. Currently I use Testing,
> which means sometimes my updates have to be delayed a few hours (as told by
> the aptitude interfaces).
>

I ditched debian because stable was years behind the curve, Mint
appearto be based on 'testing'

--
The New Left are the people they warned you about.

rbowman wrote this post; take it under advisement:

> On Wed, 9 Oct 2024 16:36:07 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>
>> Debian has 3 levels: stable, testing, and unstable (Sid).
>>
>> Pick your poison. I used Sid for many years. Currently I use Testing,
>> which means sometimes my updates have to be delayed a few hours (as told
>> by the aptitude interfaces).
>
> I have Debian on my work Linux box. Stable is good for a production
> machine.

So far, my little Trycoo WI-6 mini PC is handling the Win 11 Pro / Debian
Testing (trixie) well. The Debian side is notably faster at compiling than
using MSYS2 on the Win side.

Installing the Brother printer driver was even easier in Debian than it was
on Arch (via AUR)... it's just an apt-get call.

I do still have one issue that has resisted all my efforts at
trouble-shooting... I can SSH into the WI-6 (Debian) from my other boxes,
but I cannot SSH from the WI-6 to the others (but the WI-6 works fine
with the SSH interface to GitHub). Haven't tried it from Windows yet.

Firewall? No. Wrong port? No. SSH servers? All running fine.

Can't even ping the other laptops (but can ping google).

[ Ugh, an annoying apeshit iPhone commercial on the tube right now ]

--
Don't hit me!! I'm in the Twilight Zone!!!

On 10/4/24 03:42, rbowman wrote:
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 03:53:28 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>
>> On 4 Oct 2024 02:53:36 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 4 Oct 2024 00:37:13 -0000 (UTC), Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
>>>
>>>> Here in NZ we got the system changed as a result of a referendum in
>>>> 1993, getting rid of British-style first-past-the-post in favour of
>>>> German-style MMP.
>>>
>>> That has worked so well for Germany.
>>
>> Yes it has. It has kept them from having another storming of the
>> Reichstag. Unlike what happened in the USA during the term of your own
>> would-be dictator.
>
> Oh, horseshit.

No, exactly right.

On 10/5/24 02:22, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
> On 4 Oct 2024 23:14:50 GMT, rbowman wrote:
>
>> The US is notorious for perks.
>
> I would describe your system as “soft corruption”: it seems like, as long
> as you cannot directly tie particular dollar campaign contributions to
> particular votes, anything less than that is perfectly fine.
>
> Remember, “innocent until proven guilty” is only supposed to apply to
> private citizens going about their private business; those who are given
> statutory power over others must prove themselves to be squeaky clean, to
> be morally qualified to exercise this power; if there is any reasonable
> doubt about this, they must step down.

The way coercive plea bargaining works, "innocent until proven guilty"
is not used in the US.

Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 20:36 this Wednesday (GMT):
> candycanearter07 wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>
>> 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote at 03:07 this Friday (GMT):
>>> On 10/3/24 6:40 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:26 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 16:00:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 21:58 this Monday (GMT):
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suspect PayPal and Ebay actually do still use COBOL somewhere
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Where would they have got it from? They were both entrepreneurial
>>>>>>> startups, offering an entirely new kind of financial/commercial service
>>>>>>> essentially from scratch.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> /Sometimes/ having an outdated system is beneficial (CloudFlare
>>>>>> disaster)
>>>>>
>>>>> Did COBOL have something to do with that?
>>>>
>>>> Oh, I meant more the couple of companies that managed to keep running
>>>> stuff, like Southwest.
>>>
>>> Well ... sometimes an 'obsolete' language as the
>>> base of your operations - kinda like "Latin" - it
>>> doesn't really CHANGE anymore, No COBOL-2025 where
>>> they've changed half the stuff .......
>>>
>>> As such "obsolete" CAN equal "stability".
>>
>> Like debian?
>
> Debian has 3 levels: stable, testing, and unstable (Sid).
>
> Pick your poison. I used Sid for many years. Currently I use Testing,
> which means sometimes my updates have to be delayed a few hours (as told by
> the aptitude interfaces).

Oh, cool. I'm using stable after my arch install got nuked.
--
user <candycane> is generated from /dev/urandom

On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:16:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

> I ditched debian because stable was years behind the curve ...

That’s precisely why it’s so good for mission-critical servers: utterly
boring, yet rock-solid.

On 10/6/24 6:58 PM, Peter Flass wrote:
> 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>> On 9/24/24 3:04 PM, Lester Thorpe wrote:
>>> On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 02:45:16 -0400, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Me, I'd rather use 'C' ... which was a brand new
>>>> language when I got into computers - it was the
>>>> Cool New Thing on PDP-11s. However the syntax IS,
>>>> and especially can be MADE, a bit obscure. More
>>>> 'obvious', 'self-documenting' langs DO have an
>>>> advantage.
>>>>
>>>
>>> C is just shorthand for assembly, and assembly,
>>> i.e. machine, language is the language to which
>>> EVERYTHING else reduces.
>>>
>>> Yes, C is just shorthand for assembly. Whenever I
>>> write C code I can always "see" the assembly instructions
>>> that lie beneath every C statement.
>>>
>>> In fact, when it comes to SIMD programming, there are C
>>> functions known as "intrinsics" that allow direct access
>>> to SIMD hardware assembly instruction (e.g. SSE2, AVX).
>>> (These do not exist for any other language.)
>>>
>>>
>>> Conclusion:
>>>
>>> Those who understand the machine use C (assembly) and only
>>> C.
>>>
>>> All dumb-fuck idiots and retards, of which there are hordes
>>> in commercial (i.e. paid) programming, MUST use other "crutch"
>>> languages.
>>
>>
>> We 'old guys' did a fair amount of ASM back in
>> the day - microcontrollers, even up to early CP/M
>> and DOS before there were (affordable) high-level
>> compilers.
>>
>> Knew one ultra-geek who wrote clones of popular
>> video games for C64/PET. He was one of those
>> 'critically intelligent' people - right on the
>> very edge. Ever see that old Val Kilmer movie
>> about the genius school ? He was kinda like the
>> guy who lived inside the walls. He didn't even
>> do ASM, but wrote in raw 6502 binary. Said it
>> gave him a buzz ! Watched him do it.
>>
>> It's very frustrating - being JUST smart enough to
>> really smell the ultra-IQ, see its possibilities,
>> but knowing you can never GET there :-)
>>
>> I downloaded a copy of the ancient Aztec 'C'
>> compiler for CP/M-86. Haven't done anything
>> with it yet. CP/M-86 WILL run on VirtualBox.
>> Aztec was well-respected back in the day.
>> The most interesting feature though is the
>> MANUAL ... very deep into optimization and
>> smarter bit-field representations and ops.
>> You do NOT see that anymore. Those people
>> REALLY knew their product and wanted you to
>> know ALL the task-specific options.
>>
>>
>
> I used Aztec C on PC-DOS back in the day. It was the first C compiler I
> ever used.

http://aztecmuseum.ca/compilers.htm

On 10/7/24 4:24 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> David Lesher wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>
>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> On 2024-10-06, 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> We 'old guys' did a fair amount of ASM back in
>>>> the day - microcontrollers, even up to early CP/M
>>>> and DOS before there were (affordable) high-level
>>>> compilers.
>>
>>> Those of us in the mainframe world wrote a lot of
>>> assembly language too, e.g. for the IBM 360 family.
>>> Back when memory was really tight, you might not
>>> even be able to run a compiler (although RPG would
>>> run in 16K or less). And even if you had a compiler,
>>> the resulting code might not fit into memory for
>>> anything other than trivial applications.
>>
>> When at NASA-LeRC, I needed a simple PDP-11 utility to test a
>> serial card mod I'd made. I walked around seeking a software
>> wizard to create same.
>>
>> I found Wally; tall, western shirts, cowboy boots, in the
>> hallway. "What's the address of this here critter?" and I told
>> him.
>>
>> He took my pad of yellow quad paper, and wrote out ~25 lines of
>> octal. "Punch this in from the front panel.." and I did.
>
> Yeeeeeeeeee haaaaawwwwwww!
>
> Heh heh, a rented car will right through any amount of non-existent road up
> and down mountains and canyons.

Ok ...... that's a confusing response.

There ARE 'gurus' in the computer world, people who
can instantly come up with code - even ASM or binary -
to solve little problems in an instant.

186282@ud0s4.net wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 10/7/24 4:24 PM, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>> David Lesher wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>>
>>> Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-10-06, 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> We 'old guys' did a fair amount of ASM back in
>>>>> the day - microcontrollers, even up to early CP/M
>>>>> and DOS before there were (affordable) high-level
>>>>> compilers.
>>>
>>>> Those of us in the mainframe world wrote a lot of
>>>> assembly language too, e.g. for the IBM 360 family.
>>>> Back when memory was really tight, you might not
>>>> even be able to run a compiler (although RPG would
>>>> run in 16K or less). And even if you had a compiler,
>>>> the resulting code might not fit into memory for
>>>> anything other than trivial applications.
>>>
>>> When at NASA-LeRC, I needed a simple PDP-11 utility to test a
>>> serial card mod I'd made. I walked around seeking a software
>>> wizard to create same.
>>>
>>> I found Wally; tall, western shirts, cowboy boots, in the
>>> hallway. "What's the address of this here critter?" and I told
>>> him.
>>>
>>> He took my pad of yellow quad paper, and wrote out ~25 lines of
>>> octal. "Punch this in from the front panel.." and I did.
>>
>> Yeeeeeeeeee haaaaawwwwwww!
>>
>> Heh heh, a rented car will right through any amount of non-existent road up
>> and down mountains and canyons.
>
> Ok ...... that's a confusing response.

Indeed. Even I don't understand it. :-<

> There ARE 'gurus' in the computer world, people who
> can instantly come up with code - even ASM or binary -
> to solve little problems in an instant.

--
Not responsible for merchandise left over 30 days.

Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:16:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> I ditched debian because stable was years behind the curve ...
>
>That’s precisely why it’s so good for mission-critical servers: utterly
>boring, yet rock-solid.

Except, of course the vast majority of mission-critical servers
in the enterprise ran either Redhat or SUSE Enterprise distributions.

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.folklore.computers.]
On 2024-09-25, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:
> On Tue, 24 Sep 2024 16:05:25 -1000, Lynn Wheeler wrote:
>
>> ... some of the MIT CTSS/7094 went to Project MAC on the 5th flr to do
>> MULTICS ...
>
> Let’s see ... “CTSS” (Corbatò et al) stood for “Compatible Time Sharing
> System”, the “Compatible” part meant that it could not interfere with
> batch workloads run under the IBM-proprietary OS on the same hardware.
>
> Later some hackers at MIT created their own OS for the PDP-10 and named it
> “Incompatible Timesharing System” (ITS) as a sort of anti-homage to
> CTSS. ;)
>
> (You thought “MULTICS”/“UNICS” (later “UNIX”) was the only pun of its type
> to come out of the ferment of OS development in the 1960s?)

The magic of Lisp and ITS is that if you know how to use Emacs and a bit
of Elisp, you can be using Maclisp in no time.

Ditto with current Maxima on top of Common Lisp vs Macsyma. The syntax
it's 100% the same, just diferring on the available functions.
But for common plots and equations, if you do a plot in Macsyma,
Maxima will plot the same exact thing but with Gnuplot instead of
an special printer file for the PDP10. Altough you can perfectly
dump the file to a virtual tape and process it to PostScript
with modern ITS+Simh emulation tools.

candycanearter07 wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Chris Ahlstrom <OFeem1987@teleworm.us> wrote at 20:36 this Wednesday (GMT):
>> candycanearter07 wrote this post; take it under advisement:
>>
>>> 186282@ud0s4.net <186283@ud0s4.net> wrote at 03:07 this Friday (GMT):
>>>> On 10/3/24 6:40 PM, candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 22:26 this Thursday (GMT):
>>>>>> On Thu, 3 Oct 2024 16:00:05 -0000 (UTC), candycanearter07 wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote at 21:58 this Monday (GMT):
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 30 Sep 2024 12:48:30 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suspect PayPal and Ebay actually do still use COBOL somewhere
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Where would they have got it from? They were both entrepreneurial
>>>>>>>> startups, offering an entirely new kind of financial/commercial service
>>>>>>>> essentially from scratch.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> /Sometimes/ having an outdated system is beneficial (CloudFlare
>>>>>>> disaster)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Did COBOL have something to do with that?
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh, I meant more the couple of companies that managed to keep running
>>>>> stuff, like Southwest.
>>>>
>>>> Well ... sometimes an 'obsolete' language as the
>>>> base of your operations - kinda like "Latin" - it
>>>> doesn't really CHANGE anymore, No COBOL-2025 where
>>>> they've changed half the stuff .......
>>>>
>>>> As such "obsolete" CAN equal "stability".
>>>
>>> Like debian?
>>
>> Debian has 3 levels: stable, testing, and unstable (Sid).
>>
>> Pick your poison. I used Sid for many years. Currently I use Testing,
>> which means sometimes my updates have to be delayed a few hours (as told by
>> the aptitude interfaces).
>
> Oh, cool. I'm using stable after my arch install got nuked.

How did your Arch get nuked? Bad SSD like the FikWot I bought for $28 :-<

--
The church saves sinners, but science seeks to stop their manufacture.
-- Elbert Hubbard

On 2024-10-11, Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:16:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>
>> I ditched debian because stable was years behind the curve ...
>
> That’s precisely why it’s so good for mission-critical servers: utterly
> boring, yet rock-solid.

I've always said that computer systems should be ugly and boring:
ugly as in not cluttered with eye candy that only gets in the way,
and boring as in it Just Works without any unpleasant surprises.

Your average PHB wants flashy graphics - a video game, basically -
and the surprises turn it into an adventure that will keep him
amused for the afternoon. The rest of us are just trying to get
the job done with a minimum of hassle.

--
/~\ Charlie Gibbs | We'll go down in history as the
\ / <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> | first society that wouldn't save
X I'm really at ac.dekanfrus | itself because it wasn't cost-
/ \ if you read it the right way. | effective. -- Kurt Vonnegut

On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 14:43:06 GMT, Scott Lurndal wrote:

> Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
>>On Thu, 10 Oct 2024 10:16:18 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
>>
>>> I ditched debian because stable was years behind the curve ...
>>
>>That’s precisely why it’s so good for mission-critical servers: utterly
>>boring, yet rock-solid.
>
> Except, of course the vast majority of mission-critical servers in the
> enterprise ran either Redhat or SUSE Enterprise distributions.

Neither of those are known for being cutting edge.

"Red Hat Enterprise Linux provides more than an operating system—it also
connects you to Red Hat’s extensive hardware, software, and cloud partner
ecosystem, and comes with 24x7 support. Red Hat Enterprise Linux 9.4 is
our latest release, but with access to all supported versions and a 10
year life cycle, you can upgrade on your schedule and adopt new features
when needed."

The magic words are '24x7 support'. They give enterprise managers a warm
feeling even if they never make use of the support. The same can be said
of Windows Server, Dell support, and so forth. It isn't only software.
There is a whole business model built on offering extended warranties for
cars and appliances and it's a money maker.

An interesting metric would be how many AWS clients use the generic Linux
option versus RHEL or SUSE.

On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 10:59:44 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

> How did your Arch get nuked? Bad SSD like the FikWot I bought for $28
> :-<

Was it that much cheaper than Crucial or Kingston?

On Fri, 11 Oct 2024 17:59:46 GMT, Charlie Gibbs wrote:

> I've always said that computer systems should be ugly and boring: ugly
> as in not cluttered with eye candy that only gets in the way,
> and boring as in it Just Works without any unpleasant surprises.

Depends on what you use them for. My smartphone and laptop are “computer
systems”, as is the workstation I’m sitting in front of right now. They’re
in my face all the time, so I don’t want them to be “ugly and boring”; I
want them to be a joy to use.

The servers that I am responsible for run boring Debian Stable
installations, but even they are not really ugly (noisy and hot, yes, but
that’s another matter); the server makers decided decades ago that they
had to hire industrial designers to make their products look at least
minimally photogenic, so photos of racks and racks of blinkenlights were
actually worth taking, and using to spice up boring articles and
presentations, instead of making them even more boring.