Modern ZGC guarantees under 1ms pause times, and Azul's pauseless C4 has been around for a while too.

Most mods don't even touch the rendering system, they just supply models in json format. If you do need custom rendering, Minecraft has the Blaze3D api, and that should be mostly unchanged. There are relatively few mods like Sodium and Iris that make extensive use of direct opengl calls.

I wasn't aware of Blaze3D, thanks.

Many data centers use evaporative cooling, since it's much cheaper than closed loop. This requires a constant input of water.

I have not used quadlets in a "real" production environment but deploying systemd services is very easy to automate with something like Ansible.

But I don't see this as a replacement for k8s as a platform for generic applications, more for deploying a specific set of containers to a fleet of servers with less overhead and complexity.

> Ansible is just a mistake that people refuse to stop using.

So is Helm! Helm is just a mistake that people refuse to stop using.

Nobody who has used Helm in anger will debate this with you.

I have never denied helm is a mistake that people refuse to stop using. I quite think of Helm as the same as Ansible. Helm is only nice when you consume packages written by others.

Please elaborate

Ansible is a procedural mess. It's like helm had a baby with a very bad procedural language. It works, but it's such a mess to work with. Half of the time it breaks because you haven't thought about some if statement that covers a single node or some bs.

Comparing that to docker swarm and/or k8s manifests (I guess even Helm if you're not the one developing charts), Ansible is a complete mess. You're better off managing things with Puppet or Salt, as that gives you an actual declarative mechanism (i.e. desired state like K8s manifests).

> Ansible is a complete mess. You're better off managing things with Puppet or Salt, as that gives you an actual declarative mechanism

We thought this, too, when choosing Salt over Ansible, but that was a complete disaster.

Ansible is definitely designed to operate at a lower abstraction level, but modules that behave like desired state declarations actually work very well. And creating your own modules turned out to be at least an order of magnitude easier than in Salt.

We do use Ansible to manage containers via podman-systemd, but slightly hampered by Ubuntu not shipping with podman 5. It's... fine?

Our mixed Windows, Linux VM and Linux bare metal deployment scenario is likely fairly niche, but Ansible is really the only tenable solution.

All of them are trying to create something which seems declarative on top of a mutable system.

In my experience, it only works decently well when a special care is taken of when writing playbooks.

There are actually two versions of the Curseforge client, the "Overwolf" version that is built on that platform (and is quite bad as a result) and a newer standalone version that doesn't use Overwolf, it's much better.

Main difference for NeoForge developers will be method parameter names in the IDE, the current mapping doesn't include those. We have community mappings (Parchment) for common methods, but there are a lot of less used functions that just have decompiler names. I don't use Fabric so I'm not sure how it will affect those devs.

You don't need anything besides the agent if you're just using it for a single computer. The agent can back up to a drive or network location without being connected to the backup repository.

If someone is sleeping on your couch, then you lose the ability to sleep on it yourself, because they are taking up the space.

Well then they can sleep in your bed if you want the couch or someone else in your home you aren't using.

But then how do we determine who has priority for the couch? The singleton nature of the couch requires some form of access control to prevent disputes. No such restriction exists for a memory of the couch, once we have each been exposed to it we can enjoy the memory perpetually and simultaneously with no conflicts.

Artificially restricting what can be remembered and by whom solely on the basis that some forms of memory produce new physical artifacts ("copies") is absurd on its face.

That said, the ability to monetize a memory is much more like the couch. In theory this is the resource copyright aims to protect. In practice, experts disagree to what extent piracy impacts potential monetization leaving us with two sides of the debate tending to talk past eachother.

If someone else is sleeping on it, it’s not your couch until you remove them from it and occupy it yourself.

Unless we agree upon the abstract concept of “owning” property even while you do not physically possess it.

You need look no father than a kindergarten to see the natural way of things: the toy belongs to whichever toddler is holding it.

While not entirely comparable, it is no more absurd to extend the idea to intangible ideas as well.

The discussion was started on IP law, you have to agree on abstract concepts of ownership as a bedrock of the entire system since you can’t physically be in possession of an idea.

If you need to bring us down to kindergarten or toddler level for us to no longer need to come to an agreement on the definition of ownership, I’m not sure there’s much more to discuss

Yes, a simple lock (in the concurrent software sense) is one system that could work. Harking back to my own kindergarten experience, though, I am not sure if such a system is best for minimizing disputes.

Federal employees already do not have the right to strike, see 5 U.S.C. §7311.