Bruh 😂 the Emacs user community absolutely constantly shit on Vim users. When they added Vi(m) bindings they literally named it ‘evil mode’, and they constantly make fun of people who use it, and spacemacs, and the latest flavor of (neo)vi(m), and all the extensions necessary to make vim halfway useful as an ide, etc etc etc.
Haha, wow that was crazy, right everyone? Geeze, why did we even do that thing we did? What was that even? So weird!
Anyway, everything is back to the way it was before! Maybe even better! You can all come back now from the various forks and open alternatives you’ve spent the last 18 months migrating to!
Entangled particles cannot transmit information between the pairs. That would violate information theory and likely causality as well.
Quantum networking is instead focused on using extremely robust encryption that can detect interception using entangled pairs of light particles being transmitted together in the fiber optics.
Edit:
To elaborate on this, let’s talk about how entanglement works.
Let’s say I have two identical bags. Into each of the bags I put one of two balls, one colored red, the other blue. I then mix these bags up like a shell game and hand you one.
Now you can travel anywhere in the universe, and when you open your bag, you know exactly what color you have and what color I have too. No information transmitted, only information inferred.
Now the quantum part is tricky. Basically when you do this experiment with quantum particles, for example generating two particles, one that must be spun up, the other that must be spin down, there’s a lot of science that “proves” the particles spins are each entirely random, implying that somehow when you examine one you force BOTH particles to pick their opposite spins instantaneously across any distance.
Now there are two major explanations for how truly random gets ‘picked’ by the universe.
The first one is Bell’s theorem, or ‘spooky action at a distance’, basically claiming that until you ‘observe’ the particles they both exist in an undetermined state, neither spin up or down, and when you look, the universe forces things to get corrected through some mechanism we don’t understand. Scientists generally prefer this theory because the math is clean and beautiful, and randomness written into the most fundamental levels of the universe fits philosophical ideals nicely (more on that in a minute).
The primary alternative theory is much more mundane, but has huge implications. Basically this theory, called super determinism, claims there is no such thing as true random, and instead the universe has a set of hidden variables determined from the very beginning of the universe. This implies that time is an illusion and everything is fully deterministic across the entire universe. Scientists generally hate this theory because the math is much harder and uglier, and some interpret this to mean there is no free will.
The Disney retcon team will be at your location shortly, please remain where you are and do not resist.
This is precisely what Opensuse MicroOS, Aeon, etc do, with the one difference that they use the snapshots as a fallback rather than a test env.
I guess it depends on scale.
FSearch
Recoll
TypeSense
Well realistically it’s up to Samsung and Micron to respond. We could get a price war, which would be grand. But unfortunately we’ll probably instead see price collusion once again and the main competition will effectively settle on a price they’re all making a ton of money at.
Oh wow so that means the consumer cost will be -50%, right? …Right?
Entirely fair.
There are many ML/AI models that are doing a lot more good than harm. The shitty mass market chat bots and art generators are mostly hype and greed.
But Mathematics, physics, healthcare, and many other industries have embraced models that accomplish amazing things humans with similar resources just could not.
It’s a problem of application.
Yup. A seriously intelligent AI we probably wouldn’t have to worry too much about. Morality, and prosocial behavior are logical and safer than the alternative.
But a dumb AI that manages to get too much access is extremely risky.
Well… now the paperclip thought experiment becomes slightly more prescient.
I certainly have been getting updates recently on EOS. Maybe try refreshing your gpg keys and checking your mirror list?
Try Lunarvim. It’s NeoVim, but ships as a fully functional IDE with easy customization if needed. Honestly I basically just changed the theme, font, and added a preview scrollbar.
Blazingly fast, extremely functional, endless customization if desired.
+1 for Gitlab. As the number of developers increases the features of Gitlab will get more and more important. Only OP can say, but if they’re closer to 9 developers than 2, I think it’s a safe bet they’ll need the extra features sooner rather than later.
Its dangerous to send goalposts flying around that fast, be careful or you’ll hurt yourself.
Your response is condescending, arguing from ignorance, and arguing in bad faith. I will reply this time, because once again you’re trying to build an argument on extremely shaky ground and I don’t enjoy people spreading ignorance unchallenged. However I won’t engage any further and feed whatever you think you’re getting from this.
I haven’t suggested that people should use Obsidian over OSS solutions. I was simply pointing out your argument against Obsidian’s architecture was poorly founded.
The data you’re insinuating will be lost is pure FUD. While the format isn’t standard markdown, none of the well implemented solutions are, because as you so rightly pointed out, markdown has little to no support for most of these features.
However, obsidian’s format is well documented and well understood. There are dozens of FOSS plugins and tools for converting or directly importing obsidian data to nearly every other solution. Due to obsidian’s popularity, it’s interoperability this way is often far superior to FOSS solutions’.
Content is your notes. In obsidian this is represented by markdown files in a flat filesystem. This format is already cross platform and doesn’t need to be exported.
Metadata is extracted information from your notes that makes processing the data more efficient. Tags, links, timestamp, keywords, titles, filenames, etc are metadata, stored in the metadata database. When you search for something in obsidian, or view the graph, or list files in a tag etc obsidian only opens the metadata database to process the request. It only opens the file for read/write.
Does this help?
Tell me, are you aware of the distinction between content and metadata?
Also, what do you mean, no official export? The data is already sitting on your filesystem in markdown…?
This isn’t really the case though. Obsidian uses a database for metadata, and therefore can extremely rapidly display, search, and find the correct file to open. It generally only opens a handful of files at a time.
I’ve used obsidian notes repos with hundreds of thousands of notes with no discernable performance impact. Something LogSeq certainly couldn’t do.
The complaint in the post you’ve linked is a) anecdotal and b) about the import process itself getting slow, which makes sense as obsidian is extracting the metadata.
I’ll always champion OSS software over proprietary, but claiming this is a huge failing of the obsidian design is just completely false. A metadata database fronting a flat filesystem architecture is very robust.
Edit: adding link to benchmark. https://www.goedel.io/p/interlude-obsidian-vs-100000
Oh to be clear, it’s all humor. At least mostly, I’m sure there are RMS level fanatics somewhere that truly believe some of the BS.
This is something as old as time. I’ve seen it prolifically on Reddit (though not in the Emacs community, they generally discourage memes), various Linux forums, old Usenet, various programming forums… I’m not trying to be evasive, but it’s hard to provide examples that aren’t specifically cherry picked, which wouldn’t benefit the conversation much.
There’s even a Wikipedia page dedicated to this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editor_war