I was hoping this would end on a lighter note which gives some credit (praise?) to those who don't strive for wealth/ money. Alas, this is not the case. Or did I misinterpret what the author is trying to say?
Edit: just read another comment which validates what I was thinking:
> This wasn't worth reading. It is basically a giant wall of text, potentially AI generated, drawing comparisons that aren't important nor do they get to the call to action.
Thunderbird. Seriously though, why do people hate on it so much? I use it on all of my non-mobile devices and the latest version out of the box (at least for Linux desktops) is really sleek.
My only issue is Google Calendar integration, and that's only because auto-generated calendar entries suck and cannot be dismissed. When those events pop up, I just click on the link in the notification which takes me to the email and calendar view, and I delete the auto-gemerated event on the Gmail website.
I've heard folks complain it gets slow with very large or old mailboxes. One reason that happens is that they need to be compacted, another is that the sqlites need to be vacuumed.
So, twice a year I compact my mailboxes, and I put a sqlite command loop to vacuum in my main cleanup script. Which I run maybe once a month.
Yes, strictly speaking I shouldn't need to do this, but my tbird install has been running happily for decades now.
Because in v115 (I think, it's been a while), the interface received a thick coat of clown makeup for no reason, and now it's terrible and there's no way to revert it. You can apparently hack some CSS to make it tolerable, but I'm not going to engage in a war with my email client, because I know that solution will break with every update.
You search for a solution to this, you get plenty of hits of people trying to revert the UI. I'm not alone with this opinion. It's an email client, it's not supposed to be new and exciting. The interface was fine.
All I really want is working Kmail. It's boring in the best kind of way.
Is "Message List Display Options -> Table View" not pretty well exactly what you want? I enabled it (on desktop) shortly after the roll-out, and I've never had it revert back. There's no CSS hackery, no forced reversion, not even a hidden menu - Card vs. Table view is a top-level menu item.
Telling me "There's no way to revert it" feels like, at best, giving up at the sign of the smallest difficulty. At worst it's a bad-faith argument, as it's clearly possible - and fairly easy and straightforward, IMO.
Mozilla themselves called it "Rebuilding The Thunderbird Interface From Scratch", and as we know, rebuilding something from scratch is a great idea, and improves the product on all metrics always.
In my opinion, it's a travesty. I refuse to use it. I would rather use broken Kmail.
(sorry it's probably it an unpopular opinion) the error handling is hard to read, they purposely didn't incorporate any syntax sugars and innovations of previous years. They were one of the first popular languages with go routines although Project Loom in Java will soon have preemptive multi threading as well.
I feel validated by your comment. When I first read about the Metaverse, I thought to myself that Zuckerberg saw that movie and wanted to build it in real life.
> The agency defined AI as "a machine-based system that can, for a given set of human-defined objectives, make predictions, recommendations, or decisions influencing real or virtual environments," and warns insurers against using an "algorithm that determines coverage based on a larger data set, instead of the individual patient's medical history, the physician’s recommendations, or clinical notes."
this seems reasonable. my initial thought was that insurers already use statistical models to determine profitability, so this ban on "AI" (aka large statistical model) could potentially undermine the fundamental groundwork of an insurance company, but it sounds like we're just disallowing the use of a recommendation system.
I feel that this is a reasonable thing to do across domains, at least for now, since I believe that most humans don't understand how "AI" works, and might forget to use their own (better) judgment for a decision.
Not OP, but I would say yes. And I would argue that humans behave similarly, except that we have an innate sense to question the status quo. For some of us, this trait is more prominent, whereas somebody who is more comfortable with the status quo will usually be stamped a conservative.
I'm looking forward to this! A couple of years ago, I had decided to upgrade my self hosted solutions after running two NUCs non-stop that are almost ten years old (and still running!). Unfortunately, I decided to go cheap with the upgrade and I bought two Minisforum computers, and one of them decided to crap out after just 6 months. No word from support yet. I want to believe that I would have gotten much better support from Intel, if anything would have happened. Also, in general, the NUCs have been more stable with seemingly mundane "features" like sleeping. I know these are just two data points, but I felt validated reading some of the other comments on the HN post from the other day where Intel announced discontinuing the NUC and where people were praising Intel for Linux support and whatnot.
I'm slowly starting to accept that I shouldn't skimp on things that I want to be
robust.
My experience with a NUC that died about 18 months into a two-year warranty was pretty good. It took a while to do all the tests they wanted, but the responses were usually same-day from Intel's side. In the end I got a replacement, whole thing took maybe two weeks (partially me being slow doing all the tests for an issue I knew needed an RMA but c'est la vie).
Which model minisforum computer did you have? Mine also died suddenly. It was the fanless Kodlix GD41. I've read of other people with similar experience. What is it about these machines that causes them to fail so quickly? I would not buy from them again.
