I also think I've also replied this to you before, but +1 for the GAO report! I use the full report as my personal model yardstick on how I document technical decisions/issues for non-technical people. The PDF is attached here:
People like to be dismissive about civil servants without looking at how much extremely high quality work is actually produced on complex subjects. Personally having interacted with them a couple of times I'm also a fan of the UK Parliamentary briefings: https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/
(unfortunately they can't make people read the briefings ..)
Usual problem, people don't understand what they do so they undervalue what they do or think it is "simple" - almost nothing involving millions of people and their interests is ever "simple".
I get somewhat annoyed when people blanket attack Whitehall (the UK Civil Service) universally i.e. the bureaucracy, yes they have problems but you don't run a country with 70 million people without some bureaucracy and ripping apart a system that has worked for centuries means throwing out a lot of good with the "bad".
It's an interesting question on Linux. On macOS entire toolchains would be fair game. I just ran `brew install colima`, `brew install llvm`, etc.
But clearly anything that would conflict with distro-specific opinionated decisions is out. Or DE-specific opinionated decisions. Maybe a good rule is "anything that would be useful simutaneously on all *nix".
I use `lima` and `llvm` every day with brew. It works great there's no reason to use distro specific tooling when you can use what everyone else is using.
"Conflict" is maybe a strong word? Homebrew installs stuff into its own directory tree so it should in theory not have issues coexisting with native packages.
If this comparison helps: before deprecation, the last practical use for AppleTalk was file sharing, e.g. legacy Time Machine. Apple dropped it, and encourages SMB and WebDAV.
Thank you, highly appreciated! Now everything makes sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AppleTalk was very thorough on the protocol's history, but I was really puzzled by the purpose and why somebody would re-implement a discontinued protocol.
> I wonder if in the future we will have more discussion of power and how to organize it in corporations, similar to what we discuss today about government.
"You have meddled with the primal forces of nature, Mr. Beale. And I won't have it!
Is that clear?! You think you've merely stopped a business deal. That is not the case. The Arabs have taken billions of dollars out of this country, and now they must put it back! It is ebb and flow, tidal gravity! It is ecological balance!
Am I getting through to you, Mr. Beale?
You get up on your little twenty-one inch screen and howl about America and democracy. There is no America. There is no democracy. There is only IBM and ITT and AT&T and DuPont, Dow, Union Carbide, and Exxon. Those are the nations of the world today.
What do you think the Russians talk about in their councils of state -- Karl Marx? They get out their linear programming charts, statistical decision theories, minimax solutions, and compute the price-cost probabilities of their transactions and investments, just like we do."
I think mathematics is feeling that concern with training acutely. The average math department pays its way by teaching in all forms and all levels: they don’t bring in the magnitude of grant money that concretely impacts a university’s budget. But they are already dealing with the consequences of that - that’s why universities that are cutting due to “low student demand” are going after math programs.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/gao-26-106918.pdf
reply