Or burned out because they get pulled into every project that’s gone off the rails.

Sure, but one disadvantage is they’re harder to stack.

Take it to an electronics recycling center. Seriously.

If you already have a homelab, you plan to replace it, you don’t want to repair it, and you don’t have an obvious use case for another machine (it’s just another computer; you either have the need for another computer or you don’t), then holding onto it is just hoarding.

Yes I’m aware of the security tradeoffs with testing, which is why I’ve started refraining from mentioning it as an option as pedants like to pop out of the woodwork and mention this exact issue every damn time.

Also, testing absolutely gets “security support”, the issue is that security fixes don’t land in testing immediately and so there can be some delay. As per the FAQ:

Security for testing benefits from the security efforts of the entire project for unstable. However, there is a minimum two-day migration delay, and sometimes security fixes can be held up by transitions. The Security Team helps to move along those transitions holding back important security uploads, but this is not always possible and delays may occur.

Thats seriously overstating things. I’ve been running testing or sid for years and years, and I can only remember a handful of times where anything meaningfully broke. And typically its dependency breakages, not actual software breakages.

For the target users of Debian stable? No.

Debian stable is for servers or other applications where security and predictability are paramount. For that application I absolutely do not want a lot package churn. Quite the opposite.

Meanwhile Sid provides a rolling release experience that in practice is every bit as stable as any other rolling release distro.

And if I have something running stable and I really need to pull in the latest of something, I can always mix and match.

What makes Debian unique is that it offers a spectrum of options for different use cases and then lets me choose.

If you don’t want that, fine, don’t use Debian. But for a lot of us, we choose Debian because of how it’s managed, not in spite of it.

So don’t run stable on a desktop? If you want a bleeding edge rolling release, that’s what sid is for.

Sure, in the same way that some people only watch movies once, or read books once.

Speaking for myself, I’ve found only a small handful of games are worth my replay time, and most of them are Mass Effect…

That’s roughly right, but that doesn’t make him in any meaningful way “good”. Of course I also don’t think anyone who decided to drop the bombs on Japan was a “good guy”. But maybe that’s why I’m not a pure utilitarian.

Absolutely not, unless you adhere to pure utilitarianism. Veidt kills untold numbers of innocent people on a self-imposed quest to do what he believes will save humanity. He was a straight up megalomaniac and the only upside is that his murderous actions eventually lead to peace.

Oh, no worries, just figured I’d add that extra little bit of detail as it’s a useful hook into a lot of other git concepts.

For folks unaware, the technical git term, here, is a ‘ref’. Everything that points to a commit is a ref, whether it’s HEAD, the tip of a branch, or a tag. If the git manpage mentions a ‘ref’ that’s what it’s talking about.

Common CSV parsers don’t require it and I’ve seen plenty of examples of unquoted CSV cells (which, given there’s no actual standard for the format, isn’t too surprising). Hell I’ve created my fair share while throwing together ad hoc datasets. The idea that some of these dumps might be made by folks who are too careless to properly quote and escape their CSV data isn’t hard to believe at all.

deleted by creator

If you have an Android phone I can’t recommend Genius Scan enough. Fast, accurate, lots of features. I use it with syncthing by exporting the files to a folder that’s configured to sync the paperless input folder.

Just want to say thank you! Paperless is one of the first things I recommend to anyone considering self hosting their infra. Amazing piece of work!

deleted by creator

There are more beginners then there are experts, so in the absence of research a beginner UI is a safer bet.

If you’re in the business of creating high quality UX, and you’re building a UI without even the most basic research–understanding your target user–you’ve already failed.

And yes, if you definite “beginner” to be someone with expert training and experience, then yes an expert UI would be better for that “beginner”. What a strange way to define “beginner” though.

If I’m building a product that’s targeting software developers, a “beginner” has a very different definition than if I’m targeting grade school children, and the UX considerations will be vastly different.

This is, like, first principles of product development stuff, here.

Unless you’ve actually done the user research, you have no idea if a “beginner friendly UX is a safer bet” . It’s just a guess. Sometimes it’s a good guess. Sometimes it’s not. The correct answer is always “it depends”.

Hell, whether or not a form full of fields is or isn’t “beginner” friendly is even debatable given the world “beginner” is context-specific. Without knowing who that user is, their background, their training, and the work context, you have no way of knowing for sure. You just have a bunch of assumptions you’re making.

As for the rest, human data entry that cannot be automated is incredibly common, regardless of your personal feelings about it. If you’ve walked into a government office, healthcare setting, legal setting, etc, and had someone ask you a bunch of questions, you might be surprised to hear that the odds are very good that human was punching your answers into a computer.

Without knowing what the user is actually doing, that’s impossible to know. If the user has to input all those fields on a regular basis, then that one screen is the superior UX.