riskable

It's already like that except the funding part. There's free online learning for basically anything available to everyone in the world, 24/7. And people do take advantage of it.

You can learn whatever TF you want from reliable, trusted sources it's just that all you get from it is the knowledge. You don't normally get a degree or a certificate or anything like that. Because those things are for traditional institutions (and how they make money).

If you really want to learn something, go learn it. What's stopping you?

It's already like that except the funding part. There's free online learning for basically anything available to everyone in the world, 24/7. And people do take advantage of it.

You can learn whatever TF you want from reliable, trusted sources it's just that all you get from it is the knowledge. You don't normally get a degree or a certificate or anything like that. Because those things are for traditional institutions (and how they make money).

If you really want to learn something, go learn it. What's stopping you?

That's not really a good idea... Just because life expectancy could go up doesn't mean that a person's cognitive function will remain the same if they live longer.

A senator could have the mental capacity of a toddler at 110 even if the life expectancy at the time were 150.

Even if we have super geniuses at 150 we should still be giving control of the government to people under 70. Let the "young" run the country.

They officially don't care about running .NET applications on Linux anymore. They never really did before but so few people fell for that trap Microsoft is finally ready to turn in the towel

We need a maximum age for all government positions in the US. The science says at around 70 is when humans start losing their mental faculties (on average).

It's not just about that though: The government shouldn't be run by old people! And by, "old" I mean over 70. That way there's no ambiguity.

You had corruption with btrfs? Was this with a spinning disk or an SSD?

I've been using btrfs for over a decade on several filesystems/machines and I've had my share of problems (mostly due to ignorance) but I've never encountered corruption. Mostly I just run out of disk space because I forgot to balance or the disk itself had an issue and I lost whatever it was that was stored in those blocks.

I've had to repair a btrfs partition before due to who-knows-what back when it was new but it's been over a decade since I've had an issue like that. I remember btrfs check --repair being totally useless back then haha. My memory on that event is fuzzy but I think I fixed whatever it was bitching about by remounting the filesystem with an extra option that forced it to recreate a cache of some sort. It ran for many years after that until the disk spun itself into oblivion.

I wouldn't say, "repairing XFS is much easier." Yeah, fsck -y with XFS is really all you have to do 99% of the time but also you're much more likely to get corrupted stuff when you're in that situation compared to say, btrfs which supports snapshotting and redundancy.

Another problem with XFS is its lack of flexibility. By that I don't mean, "you can configure it across any number of partitions on-the-fly in any number of (extreme) ways" (like you can with btrfs and zfs). I mean it doesn't have very many options as to how it should deal with things like inodes (e.g. tail allocation). You can increase the total amount of space allowed for inode allocation but only when you create the filesystem and even then it has a (kind of absurdly) limited number that would surprise most folks here.

As an example, with an XFS filesystem, in order to store 2 billion symlimks (each one takes an inode) you would need 1TiB of storage just for the inodes. Contrast that with something like btrfs with max_inline set to 2048 (the default) and 2 billion symlimks will take up a little less than 1GB (assuming a simplistic setup on at least a 50GB single partition).

Learn more about btrfs inlining: https://btrfs.readthedocs.io/en/latest/Inline-files.html

One point: ext4 has a maximum file size of 16TiB. To a regular user that is stupidly huge and of no concern but it's exactly the type of thing you overlook if you "just use ext4" on anything and everything then end up with your database broken at work because of said bad advice.

Use the filesystem that makes the most sense for your use case. Consider it every single time you format a disk. Don't become complacent! Also fuck around with the new shit from time to time! I decided to format my Linux desktop partitions with btrfs over a decade ago and as a result I'm an excellent user of that filesystem but you know what? I'm thinking I'll try bcachefs soon and fiddle around more with my zfs partition on my HTPC.

BTW: If you're thinking about trying out btrfs I would encourage you to learn about it's non-trivial maintenance tasks. btrfs needs you to fuck with it from time to time or you'll run out of disk space "for no reason". You can schedule cron jobs to take care of everything (as I have done) but you still need to learn how it all works. It's not a "set it and forget it" FS like ext4.

What advantage does EGS have? Epic levels of anti-consumer sentiment? Horrific customer service? Biggest piece of shit company in the gaming industry?

Give us this day our daily tortillas.

The first few dozen generations will get cancer, sure but eventually those plastics will be "an essential source of hydrocarbons" and the government will declare a public health emergency when plants and fish are suddenly missing these essential ingredients for chip-in-brain compatibility to work.

It's because Wikipedia requires sourcing on claims and Bayer puts in extra effort to get scientific papers removed or "debunked" (find the tiniest, irrelevant flaw and then lobby hard to get it retracted).