Not really, I'm not new to containers.
This might blow yours though: I once booted up from a Tomsrtbt disk, installed Debian, added some RedHat packages, and topped it up with some pinned downgrades from Ubuntu.
On bare metal, no containers, no rebooting.
Can you do 56K?
Was-a-house... ๐
Could you link some examples?
Also keep in mind that people can release their work under multiple licenses, so they may upload the same work with a different license (like a privative one) to other markets.
There is no need to get notified, they didn't steal passwords, just session cookies. Most (all?) servers have invalidated all the user login cookies, but if you are in doubt, just logging out and back in should be enough to get a new cookie.
"god created man in his likeness". Oh yeah, did he create aliens in his likeness too?
Depends on what that "likeness" is. What if "God created both man and alien to be bloodthirsty creatures to fight each other"... and the winner gets to fight God live on GodTV. In the meantime, tune in to PlanetaryWars channel this weekend to see a whole civilization annihilate itself!
"do one thing well"
Arguably, Systemd does exactly that: orchestrate the parallel starting of services, and do it well.
The problem with init.d and sys.v is they were not designed for multi-core systems where multiple services can start at once, and had no concept of which service depended on which, other than a lineal "this before that". Over the years, they got extended with very dirty hacks and tons of support functions that were not consistent between distributions, and still barely functional.
Systemd cleaned all of that up, added parallel starting taking into account service dependencies, which meant adding an enhanced journaling system to pull status responses from multiple services at once, same for pulling device updates, and security and isolation configs.
It's really the minimum that can be done (well) for a parallel start system.
I'd go further, and say that most scientific papers are profoundly unscientific: without the data and analysis process they base their claims on, most papers are no different than just saying "believe me, I'm a scientist".
There are some honorable exceptions, of papers which publish accompanying data and the tools they used to process it, but the vast majority don't.
The fact that negative results don't get published at all, is just disrespecting the word "science". One of its basic premises is that of falsability, so proving a theory wrong, is just as valuable as proving a different one right.
That could still come to Lemmy, if posts start being seen by hundreds of thousands of people, particularly if they come from instances which don't share the same netiquette as the one the post is made on. Of course there's defederation to fight that, but I feel like it can only go so far.
You can change the sorting, I actually have this post sorted by "top" right now.
I know how to program, I also know how to wonder how many instances are running off the docker-compose with publicly exposed postgres... that would make import/export really easy, wouldn't it? ๐
Anyway, would you say this isn't the right place to discuss this stuff?
That's racist.