You should take pity on them. They are unfortunate people who live in a dictatorship. Russians who tried to protest were arrested and taken in unknown direction by authorities.
I honestly do take pity on russians but I also chose to not engage with russian culture to sanitize my own environment as it's just too ruined for any healthy engagement.
Hence, the weak spot in Russia‘s age old decrying of „NATO-encroachment“: It is Russia‘s neighboring countries themselves that immediately sought NATO-membership
Ah yes all the freedom fighters and culture preservationists had zero impact in securing Lithuania's freedom - what an incredibly dumb, disrespectful and frankly depressing take.
depressing - certainly, disrespectful - perhaps, but dumb? if instead of Gorbachev there had been another Stalin (or the current version of Putin), the empire would have endured that period of turbulence intact, and you would still be part of it.
also, the provinces that didn't fight for independence - Kazakhstan, for example - had got it anyway, whether they wanted it or not at the time.
No your logic is fundamentally flawed because it assumes a job has to reach 100% completion to have an effect. What if soviet empire collapsed precisely because the resistance was too costly.
In Lithuania in particular sabotage was a constant reality of the country for bigger chunk of a century. People were breaking the empire not only via outside resistance and cultural identity preservation but also by sabotaging soviet operations in daily activities. The empire fundamentally became unsustainable and collapsed under it's own weight and no new glorious leader could have saved it.
So whether Lithuanians are free because of their own efforts or because it just so happens that soviet empire collapsed is a fundamentally flawed question as these two things are not only correlating but are causal as well.
You're are feeding into a myth of unbreakable ussr and belittling efforts of former member states.
In any colonizer's strategy, this tactic achieves following goals
1. Instills fear, and demotivates and fragments resistance
2. Internalizes inferiority into a colonized nation
I might've been too hasty assuming you are doing this on purpose. But otoh, saying Kazakhstan is independent... that's rich. The moment Kazakh government thinks about denouncing russian as official language, putin will send a new government. Well, maybe not now, as his resources are strained.
Point is: Kazakhstan is far from independent, and Baltic states have done a lot to gain their true independence.
>otoh, saying Kazakhstan is independent... that's rich.
Kazakhstan is dependent on Russia and there is massive corruption, but for the most part it is independent. Just as independent as any other country with massive corruption.
Also, Russian speaking non native-Kazahk people are not treated so nicely there.
Young Kazakh people indeed started questioning the state of things. And I celebrate that.
At the same time, russia has huge influence over the country. Yes, corruption is exactly how russian influence is usually maintained.
That doesn't contradict my claim, however.
>saying Kazakhstan is independent... that's rich. The moment Kazakh government thinks about denouncing russian as official language, putin will send a new government
at the time of the empire's collapse, Putin was essentially a nobody. Yeltsin and the oligarchs didn't really give a fuck about Kazakhstan, Ukraine, the Baltics, and the rest. they were truly and unconditionally independent, and Russia, given its humiliating defeat in Chechnya, couldn't do shit about it even if it wanted to (which it didn't).
Oh, they gave a lot of fucks.
They ensured russian language has a special status in Ukrainian constitution, for example, despite freedom of speech and non-discrimination were already there.
They ensured the presidential candidate with strong nationalistic views, arguing for severing ties with russia, won't make it to elections.
They financed political parties pulling Ukraine back to russia.
There might've been a temporary loss of russian grip on Ukraine in those turbulent times, but that was just a tiny blip on the scale of whole timeline
Is English commonly spoken by countries that aren't former British colonies? I am a Ukranian citizen, and if I can speak Russian, and not have that kind of prejudice, you should also be able to. In fact most Ukrainians speak Russian.
It's true that Ukranian is more prevalent in western Ukraine, but that is a minority. Most people live in Kyiv, and prefer to speak Russian, including the current president of Ukraine. Or at least this was the case before the war started, and a huge chunk of population left the country.
> Exactly that gives ruskies propaganda talking points to invade Ukraine by saying they don’t like how Ukrainians treated russian speakers.
The Russians have a point there. I wish the Russian language was an official language in Ukraine, and I wish I could speak Russian in Ukraine without restrictions, but unfortunately the Ukranian government chose to instead try and force people to speak Ukranian at school, etc. But that obviously doesn't justify starting a war.
> British King isn’t delusional enough to start war with neighboring English speaking country.
Do they even have a neighbouring country that speaks English? They are dumb enough to quit EU though.
Wishing a national identity and sovereignty did not exist just for your convenience is what this thread is about.
> I wish I could speak Russian in Ukraine without restrictions
There weren't meaningful restrictions. A large number of Ukrainians still speak Russian a lot. Instead this sounds like "forcing" a number of people to speak to you in a particular language in order for you to not feel "restricted".
I was forced to speak Ukranian at school. Is this not a meaningful restriction to you?
> Instead this sounds like "forcing" a number of people to speak to you in a particular language in order for you to not feel "restricted".
Unlike Ukranian government, I never forced anyone to speak any particular language. In fact, what happens when one person prefers to speak Ukrainian, and the other person prefers to speak Russian, is they just do, and they both understand each other just fine.
100%. I saw some vids from Ukrainian frontlines where people say speaking Russian is a problem because in fast situations it's more difficult to identify if you're enemy. This means even there some people speak Russian
It's just about education in schools and official use. And it's crazy to blame a country for requiring using its home language at schools
Tons of people totally speak English there. But it's not an official language. And government totally forces kids to speak French/Dutch/whatever in schools. if England invades Netherland will you say they also have a point?;)
The point is that Ukraine used to be a part of Soviet Union, and this is why "obviously" Ukranians speak Russian, and we are drawing a parallel to how former British colonies also speak English. France et al are not former British colonies, and I assume they prefer to speak their native language at home, and not English. Not because they are forced to, but because English is not their native language.
"Брюки цвета кофе" ("pants of coffee color") is natural, "коричневые брюки" ("brown pants") is natural, but "кофейные брюки" is not. In fact the latter would likely be interpreted as "coffee pants" or "pants made out of coffee."
I admit that. I also realize that tguvot is actually arguing in my favor, as he said that coffee color is distinct from brown, and therefore the inference is that they aren't synonymous. I would summarize that they are conceptually different, as "brown" is a real color, whereas "coffee color" is a marketing color.
"кофейные брюки" is totally ok. everybody will understand it.
it's just the way the russian language is. you can abuse it, you can come up with words that do not really exist in language and make no sense, yet, everybody will understand what you meant to say
> "кофейные брюки" is totally ok. everybody will understand it.
If the context is clothes, people would likely be able to guess, sure. But consider another example "кофейная чашка" ("a coffee mug"). In this context, it would most certainly be interpreted as "a mug for coffee" and not as "a coffee-coloured mug." In other words, you must include the word "цвет" ("color") for it to be correct and unambiguous.
> it's just the way the russian language is. you can abuse it, you can come up with words that do not really exist in language and make no sense, yet, everybody will understand what you meant to say
I don't think this is unique to Russian. I'm sure you can do the same in English and Japanese at least.
It’s fine as an occasional stylistic choice, but using it repeatedly as a regular synonym for brown is a pragmatic and collocational error. The meaning is clear, but the wording is marked, and overuse makes the speech sound odd in everyday contexts.
Uh huh. Don't forget "aliceblue" and "rebeccapurple." But seriously, those are just arbitrary marketing aliases, aren't they. I remember e-shopping for sneakers, and every brand's "off-white" was a different color.
Right now the exercise movements are listed (e.g. shoulder press), which you can add to, but the routines themselves are manually entered.
I'm going to be adding in workout templates and maybe even auto-workouts (like auto progressive overload or routines like 5-3-1).
Another commenter mentioned an app that lets people write scripts to program custom routines. That sounds super interesting and a great way to share routines. I'm thinking of writing an engine for custom routines then use that to program some default ones.
It can go wrong. I had a horrible experience with StackGres. I read a lot of positive things about CloudNativePG though.
I can see where people with startups are coming from not wanting to manage database plumbing so they can focus on real business tasks. I think that's fine as long as there is a path to self-host after some growth. I might do some event-sourcing myself so that databases are effectively materialized views easy to add and remove.
We're constantly striving to improve the user experience and the quality of StackGres. Would you mind sharing some feedback as to what made your experience not good with it?
Did you join the Slack Community (https://slack.stackgres.io/) to ask if you were facing some trouble? It always helps, even if it is just by sharing your troubles.
(If you'd like to share feedback and do so privately, please DM on the Slack Community)
I did try slack. Maybe the problem is it was launched much too early. A certificate expiry issue caught me out because there wasn't an automatic process on this version to roll them over. Ironically a single database instance would have been much much more stable. I upgraded but this didn't bring up the database, restoring through the portal failed, so I had to create a new PG cluster to get my site up and I never ended up recovering the data as the process was very tedious involving PVCs rather than just pointing to my bucket.
The ratio of open to closed issues on the repo is much worse than CNPG so I would simply start there.
Thank you for your feedback. I'm trying to extract possible improvement actions from your comment, and here are my thoughts.
That certificate expiry issue was unfortunate, but was resolved (if I'm not mistaken) a couple of years ago.
StackGres is just a control plane, your database is as stable as a standalone one. StackGres itself may fail and it won't affect your database, it's not on the data plane. Indeed, it has a feature to "pause it" if you need to perform some manual operations (otherwise everything is automated).
There are procedures to reconstruct a database from PVC. It's arguably tedious, but should be much simpler than running a Postgres pod without the help of an operator like StackGres.
As for the ratio of issues: most of the issues that we get are feature and/or extensions requests, and certainly we can't tackle them all. Most, if not all, outstanding issues are addressed within a reasonable time frame. Is there any particular issue that would itch you that is open? I'd be happy to personally review it. Yet, there are as of today more than 2K closed issues, I won't call that a small number.
I'd also weight the importance of issues, like the split brain that CNPG suffers [1] and that apparently won't even be solved. StackGres relies instead on the trusted and reputed Patroni, which is known NOT to risk split brains that could lead to severe data loss.
I think people with startups just don't care. I had an interview with a startup the other day, and the interviewer said they were considering using v0 for their front-end. I really want to be wrong here, but so far it feels like all those startups are there to just take VC money for themselves and die.
Not really. Maybe for consumer. But there are many kinds of b2b infrastructure businesses that I can build and launch myself where I wouldn't want to expose myself to risk of day-long outages (for either reputational or as competitive disadvantage of having no HA story), such as anything to do with payment gateways, API gateways, AI proxies or other AI infrastructure - anything where client services would experience critical outages if your service goes down... Lots of these businesses are started without VC investment or big money from day 1.
Luckily now with solutions like Yugabyte, we can achieve enterprise-grade HA without high cost or high maintenance complexity.
You should not run a payment gateway on an inexperienced team. Start with something with lesser risk and then introduce the team to things like load balancers, keepalived, clustering and so on over time.
An hour of downtime is a lot once HA is something to invest in, and the first thing you need to do when there's an incident is to tell your customers what you're doing about it and the second thing they want to know is whether it will happen again. Since I don't know how Yugabyte works I'm not sure about the degree of lock-in, but preferably you should have an incident process where you at minute ten or so of downtime boot load balancing with a customer facing message at another infra provider and update DNS records, then start to rebuild the system there in parallel with the main incident response.
Exactly enough to fill out the address, which is always the same length. BTW, IPv4 does basically the same thing. The address 127.1 is equivalent to 127.0.0.1.
Not really the same, the mechanics are different and this particular behaviour is pretty much an accident, not abbreviation.
In IPv4 you also have 127.257 equal to 127.0.1.1, 123456789 equal to 7.91.205.21, and 010.010.010.010 is a well-know DNS server. This notation is also rejected by most implementations.
It is? Those alternate IPv4 notations are all accepted by Linux, FreeBSD, and MacOS. I remember playing around with "alternate notations" 30+ years ago on old SunOS boxes.
I am not clear what your point is. The parent's point stands. A double colon only represents zeros (that were compressed and are not displayed).
Your link does not show different addresses from a valid compression, it shows different addresses from an invalid compression. The link examples what we don't do.
Conversely, if we compress the expanded addresses in your link, we will get 2 different compressed addresses.
Because then you couldn't use ? to propagate errors if they occurred inside any loops or branches within the function, which would be a significant limitation.
That prevents other control flow mechanisms (return, break) from operating past the function boundary. In general, I avoid single-callsite functions as much as possible (including the iterator api) for this reason.
It sounds like you're fighting the language - Rust is sort of FP-light and you're encouraged to return a null/error value from the intermediate calculation instead of doing an early return from the outer scope. It's a nice and easy to follow way to structure the code IME. Yes, it's more verbose when an early return would have been just right - so be it.
For the case where `try` is useful over the functional form (i.e. parent's situation of having a desired Result, plus some unrelated early-returning), that ends up with nested `Result`s though, i.e. spamming an `Ok(Ok(x))` on all the non-erroring cases, which gets ugly fast.
You have three different value cases (main value, main Err case for `?` to consume, and whatever early-return case). And the `?` operator fully taking up the Err result case means your main-result+early-return values strictly must both be wrapped in an Ok.
Not sure if that is relevant to your point, but: For better and for worse, closing over any outer scope variables is syntactically free in Rust lambdas. You just access them.
Try blocks let you encapsulate the early-return behavior of Try-returning operations so that they don't leak through to the surrounding function. This lets you use the ? operator 1. when the Try type doesn't match that of the function this is taking place in 2. when you want to use ? to short circuit, but don't want to return from the enclosing function. For instance, in a function returning Result<T,E>, you could have a try block where you do a bunch of operations with Option and make use of the ? operator, or have ? produce an Err without returning from the enclosing function. Without try blocks, you pretty much need to define a one-off closure or function so that you can isolate the use of ? within its body.
The best part of try blocks is the ability to use the ? operator within them. Any block can return a result, but only function blocks (and try blocks) can propagate an Err with the ? operator.
The closest thing I can think of that will let you return a result from within a separate scope using a set of foo()? calls would be a lambda function that's called immediately, but that has its own problems when it comes to moving and it probably doesn't compile to very fast code either. Something like https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=stable&mode=debug&editio...
reply