Lichtblitz

Also, Kanban was invented in the 40s as a process for automotive production lines. That's why it aligns so well with maintenance and operations projects in IT. It's ridiculous how more and more people claim it comes from software development and would not fit hardware projects, when that's the core use case of the methodology.

Sorry for the confusion 😅 I don't have any experience with NixOS apart from memes here in Lemmy. So... maybe?

Yes, I love atomic distros and I'm glad the term was changed.

I never needed it. I know from my school days that windows supports that use case. You get a full system and can do with it as you please but on reboot you get a completely fresh file system. The only thing that persisted were the user profiles that roamed through active directory. Seemingly there was no way of tampering with the file system, that would persist a reboot. And as school kids we tried hard 😅

I would be surprised if Linux didn't have utilities for that, that were better designed and safer - but again, not my expertise.

Sure. Not all directories are protected and the ones that are, are just protected from immediate write access. A malicious app or a user who copies the wrong snippets can create overlays and apply them immediately without a reboot. Having atomic distros is awesome but it has nothing to do with immutability and it someone needed that for example for PCs that are in random control at least some of the time, then they need a different solution on top, that gives actual immutability.

No, that's not what I wrote.

I specifically picked the statistic that claimed to have included the full cost of installing something new. Most other statistics only include prolonging the life of existing plants, thus ignoring the installation costs completely. You can just quote the paragraphs that prove your point the same way I have and then we can discuss further. Maybe I made a mistake, who knows.

Silverblue/Kinoite

Those are not immutable, especially on the file system. I'm glad the fedora team switched the term to "atomic", because "immutable" set all the wrong expectations.

Extremely cheap per kilowatt? Every statistic out there that I've seen and that includes government funding, as well as construction and deconstruction costs, paints a different picture. Nuclear is only competitive with coal or the relatively underdeveloped solar thermal.

In 2017 the US EIA published figures for the average levelized costs per unit of output (LCOE) for generating technologies to be brought online in 2022, as modelled for its Annual Energy Outlook. These show: advanced nuclear, 9.9 ¢/kWh; natural gas, 5.7-10.9 ¢/kWh (depending on technology); and coal with 90% carbon sequestration, 12.3 ¢/kWh (rising to 14 ¢/kWh at 30%). Among the non-dispatchable technologies, LCOE estimates vary widely: wind onshore, 5.2 ¢/kWh; solar PV, 6.7 ¢/kWh; offshore wind, 14.6 ¢/kWh; and solar thermal, 18.4 ¢/kWh.

Emphasis mine, source: https://world-nuclear.org/information-library/economic-aspects/economics-of-nuclear-power

Modern browsers happily show you the actual characters, while sending their encoded entities to the server. So, from a user perspective there is no ASCII limitation. Case in point: söhne.at (just some random website, I have no idea what they are or if they are legitimate)

That would work with someone who argues fairly. But with someone, who has the super weapon of "they don't want you to know, so they hide those cases", you won't get far.

Sure, there were electric cars. But if I remember correctly, Tesla was the first to deliver the whole next-gen package with an every day, everywhere car, plus charging stations plus the whole automation. If you wanted that, there was no way around Tesla for quite a while.

Teslas were the "best", as in the only option for what they did. They were never the "best", as in better than existing products for what they did.

Being first to market for such a long time was an incredible feat and it speaks volumes that their position isn't much, much stronger at the end of it.