If you’re that worried, why not run chmod -R u+w .git inside the project dir to “un write-protect” the files, then just ascend to the directory containing the project dir (cd …) and use rm -r without -f?

The force flag (-f) is the scary one, I presume?

Wow, beautiful analogy! I’m going to use that in my professional career if you don’t mind. Also with your permission I’d like to give you credit with a link to this comment, if that’s OK with you, of course.

I wonder if this has anything to do with Apple’s CSAM scanning. You know, hang on to the photos as evidence, and, for an added bonus, sell more iCloud storage because the “System Data” now exceeds the free iCloud data storage quota. Win-win!

If it is indeed a boneheaded mistake, then it’s probably because of over reliance on RPC-type calls from the front-end that displays the data, to the back-end that actually handles the data. User deletes photo, and the front-end, instead of actually deleting it, tells the backend to do it… and then hides the photo from view, maybe updates its index of photos marking them as “deleted” regardless of whether the backend actually deleted the photo.

Then an OS update comes along, and rescans the filesystem, and report a bunch of new photos to the front-end, that then happily add them to the GUI to the user’s surprise.

Modern APIs and software architectures are a bloated, unnecessarily complex mess, and this is the result.

Whoah, isn’t FUTO the non-profit that Louis Rossmann works for? This is great news!!

The ability to walk at 40km/h speeds.

His analysis and analogies are actually pretty good, except he ruins it all with his cringy intro and outro. That’s disappointing.

Wasn’t Google Plus used to be called Circles? Man, I feel old!

If this is their attitude to a clear self-inflicted fuckup, then that’s plenty reason for me to avoid them and their services. It’s not like their services were distinct in any way… just a dime in a dozen cloud provider.

At work, if you have the option, consider using KeePassXC or similar software. That will give you a properly encrypted file with secrets and also password-manager features.

Google reminds me more and more of Microsoft of the 90s. That’s exactly the kind of compatibility breaking asinine move MS would do 30 years ago. Sigh…

What happens if you redirect all traffic to a sinkhole, rather than to 127.0.0.1? Do the devices still freak out when they talk to a web server which returns a 404? Just morbidly curious…

I think descriptive and useful error messages are OK to report as enhancements. They don’t have to be functional bugs.

Good old git blame lol! Not only can you determine when the change was made and where, it’s trivial to look up the author of the commit: https://github.com/iputils/iputils/commit/562e0d570d93cfcfdebab1215a2f04efa64a24f8

To be fair, the author’s first language may not be English…

Is anyone interested in submitting a pull request? Looks like Github contributions are accepted.

Who knows anymore with these youngsters’ vernacular?

Classic! Love this clip!!!

Better late than never and I responded! Check your DM. :)

I have the whole series as DRM-free MP3. Let me know if you want it.

Actually grub 0.x series had much more useful rescue shell tab completion than the latest release. You could easily list all boot devices, partitions, and even filesystems and their contents. All from the rescue shell. Consequently, you could boot into Linux and reinstall grub in the MBR to fix it. All that without using a boot CD/USB! Good luck doing that with the latest version of grub and UEFI.

Also getting into the BIOS on legacy firmware was also very simple. On most machines it’s the three finger salute followed by either F1, Delete or rarely F11 or F12.

The boot process was simple, and the BIOS had just one simple task: load and execute the first 512 bytes of the disk that was designated as the boot device. That’s it.

Ah yes, simplicity. MBR, with all its limitations had one killer feature: it was extremely simple.

UEFI, as powerful as it is, is the opposite of simple. Many moving parts, so many potential failure points. Unfortunately, it seems like modern software is just that: more complex and prone to failure.