Thomas H Jones

u/ferricoxide@blahaj.zone
0 posts · 17 comments

Recent posts

No posts.

Recent comments

on *Permanently Deleted* · c/linux · 2 pts · 190d

@mlody@lemmy.world

If you mean computers that "displayed" via printing rather than having a video output, yes: my highschool lab had a couple old ones (they'd actually retired a punchcard system two years before I got to 9th grade)

First computers in our house were various iterations of TRS-80s and a couple of CP/M (or was it MPM) boxes from Altos. As a 7yo, I taught myself 6502 assembler on a (fresh from the factory) Apple ][ my dad had bought (interpreted languages, like BASIC — even the "compiled" BASIC options — were dog slow, back then).

on *Permanently Deleted* · c/linux · 2 pts · 191d

@mlody@lemmy.world

I used to be purely a KSH user …20+ years ago. At that point in time, if you were running a SysV-derived OS (for me, Irix and Solaris), it was hard to beat (and, if you invoked "POSIX shell" was KSH's were the semantics the shell implemented). That said, one of the bigger pain-points of KSH (back then) was that a lot of the default packagings were kind of rubbish: if you wanted to retain your sanity, you'd replace them with a KSH93 implementation. But it's been since my Solaris days ended that I've dicked with KSH (as the Linux implementations were often just BASH running in "compatibility mode" rather than Real KSH™ or PD-KSH).

If you're writing shell scripts, the features in recent BASH implementations make it a pretty solid choice.

@SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world

Yup, but if you can reduce or remove failure-cases without reducing security or making other sacrifices it makes little sense not to.

A system with local cache (hedging against Internet outages), batteries (hedging against power failures) and strong CSE (hedging against opt-out third-party access to your data) provides a significantly higher quality solution than something like Ring or even standard CCTV.