I'm still using my decade-old Precision 5510 (the XPS 15 at the time was a variant of it), and I've rarely felt the need to replace it, beyond Nvidia no longer supporting the discrete graphics as of last year.

There was a period around Project Sputnik where they were making really good machines. Years of abuse, and it's still in good condition, though the battery has been showing its age lately.

It's rather sad that things have gone downhill since then, as there was a period there that Dell were really good.

I run Miniflux on a Digital Ocean droplet, and Miniflutt on my phone.

RSS itself provides no benefits over Atom. In fact, you're quite likely to see a bunch of RSS feeds that use elements from the Atom namespace.

You should just use Atom.

Appropriate username!

I upvoted you because I broadly agree with you, but search is never coming back in the API. They previously outlined the cost involved and there's no way, given how minimal the value it gives more broadly, it's coming back ant time soon. It's basically an abusive vector because of the compute cost.

A GenAI does not, however.

Let's not conflate GPG and PGP-in-general. RPM doesn't use GPG, it uses Sequoia PGP.

GPG is what GP is referring to as a lost cause. Now, it can be debated whether PGP-in-general is a lost cause too, but that's not what GP is claiming.

> it can be debated whether PGP-in-general is a lost cause too, but that's not what GP is claiming

It is though what both the fine article, and tptacek in these comments, are claiming!

They are also correct, but that's indeed not what the person you replied to said.

> then why haven't alternatives ^W replacements been produced for decades?

Actually we do have alternatives for it.

For example Git supports S/MIME and could absolutely be used to sign commits and tags. Even just using self-signed certificates wouldn't be far off from what PGP offers. However if people used their digital IDs like many countries offer, mission-critical code could have signatures with verifiable strong identities.

Though there are other approaches as well, both for signing and for encrypting. It's more that people haven't really considered migrating.

But it's not what cpach was writing about, is it?

Also no, the gpg.fail site makes no such claims. Now, tptacek, has said that, but he didn't write the comment you were replying to.

Hangeul is at least an alphabet, in spite of appearances, and has hints as to the pronunciation built into the glyph shapes.

At least some of that is the inevitable consequence of pronunciation changing over time ("rz" being the standout, which used to sound like the Czech soft-r, but lost its r-colouring) and others attempt to show an etymological relationship, which makes spelling a bit more difficult in some ways and easier in others.

Polish is a rather extreme case, however. Czech orthography is a bit more straightforward. In spite of that, Polish orthography still does a rather good job.

Generally speaking, if you've a language with heavy use of palatalisation in its phonology and grammar, the Latin alphabet is going to struggle without hacks. Irish and Scottish Gaelic similarly struggle with the inherent limitations of the Latin alphabet, but chose a different set of hacks (necessarily, given the Irish has the second oldest written vernacular language in Europe after Greek).

Similarly, the Latin alphabet is poorly suited to the Germanic languages, Danish and English in particular, because of their large vowel inventory.

I found Croatian significantly easier than Czech, perhaps because of centuries (millenia?) of trans-Adriatic Italian influence?

It doesn't have a hard/soft contrast though, unlike the West and East Slavic languages. Palatalisation isn't a feature of the western South Slavic languages anymore.