I've been using YNAB 4 (aka YNAB Classic on Android) for some time. I got a new phone, and the phone app finally won't run on the new phone. YNAB 4 is also quite buggy on my Arch based setup (someone maintains a package on AUR using Wine). So I think it's finally time to move on, which I think I'm doing this year.
My only issue with Buckets is that the YNAB importer doesn't take into account that YNAB will take your overspending and take it from your next month's income. I have some bad habits that means I was really using YNAB as more of a financial tracker than an actually budget system. That's my own fault though. The envelope in question comes out to $-10k... That's all my own fault though. It just means I have to massage it into Bucket's system, or start a new budget.
Timed tests encourage wrote memorization and reflexive knowledge. They don't encourage what is reflective of the modern real world knowledge recollection. In almost all scenarios, you have a book to reference for knowledge, much less search engines (and now LLMs). Almost nothing is memorized today, in the work world. What you know, in my experience, comes from frequent usage. Your timespan to work on most things is on the order of days, not minutes or an hour.
Tests should be open book, open notes, and an extensive amount of time to do the test. The questions should be such that they demonstrate an understanding of the material, not just how well you can parrot back information.
Whilst I would love tests to be open internet, this lends itself to very easy cheating. The material being taught and what notes you take about it should be enough to answer any questions posed to you about the material. Especially those that demonstrate an understanding of the material.
Sort of. There are some things that a person entering a field is expected to know without needing to look them up, because if you don't know it you won't develop good intuition or be able to execute your work in a timely manner. Most of the stuff you learn in your freshman year is this type of thing, while the later years tend to have more open-book tests.
This is also the kind of thing that you check for in an interview - somebody who needs to look up how to write a for loop isn't going to get hired as a C programmer, and somebody who isn't familiar with Ohm's law will flunk their electronics interview. So there's a very pragmatic reason to make sure that students have the basics memorized.
Narrator's Narrator: "The overwhelming majority of consumers don't care about the bootloader, so the market forces do not have an incentive to keep it unlocked. This leads to the market not 'fixing itselt'. "
This isn't the 'market not fixing itself'. This is the 'market being actively manipulated and enshittified'. Don't forget that it's much easier to leave the boot-loader unlockable or even unlockable by just the owner, than it is to keep it locked and under control of a remote corporation. They went out of their way to enshittify it.
This isn't true. It's far more secure to lock the boot loader and block root than it is to leave them open. This is a basic security measure from the OEM. They didn't just wake up yesterday and go "let's mess with those nerds."
Somebody said "easier" and you said "more secure." Then, your argument that it was more secure (which nobody was discussing) is that it is "basic." Then you added an irrelevant strawman with a slur in it against the person you were arguing with.
Yes, it is more secure against the user. That is not a desirable characteristic for the user, it is a desirable characteristic for the controller of the operating system.
I disagree. The answer to your counter is in the same comment that you're countering. It's easier to let the owner alone unlock it, rather than lock it to everyone and then control it remotely (at least for updates). At the minimum, they could have used the same mechanism to support owner unlocking.
Also, this isn't a 'nerd' problem. The economics of smart phones would be much saner if phones weren't so deliberately anti-recycling. Thus it affects all consumers. Framing this as a 'nerd vs corporation' fight is misleading at best.
I'm growing less tolerant of the use of security as a convenient excuse for these big companies to restrict their customers on their own devices. There are always alternatives that don't involve infringing on consumer rights. And most of the time, that alternative is rather trivial. But the OEMs just ignore it and never mention it while excusing themselves. That's intentional gaslighting.
> It's far more secure to lock the boot loader and block root than it is to leave them open.
And you completely neglected an important part of my question. They didn't just lock the boot loader and the root. They also put measures in place to retain remote control of the same. Why not share that control with, or simply transfer it to the owner? Please don't argue with me that this is harder than what they've done for themselves.
We all know the answer for that - profits - something they can't ever be satisfied with. As an engineer, I know that such extra privileges can be made foolproof. It can be designed to prevent normal users from accidentally messing it up, while power users and service professionals can easily navigate their way to a full customization. I know this because I still retain that control on my laptop. There is absolutely no reason why it has to be different on a phone.
But OEMs won't consider it, talk about it or even entertain public discourse about it. Instead, they spend plenty of money on projecting the consumers they exploit as too naive and incompetent to take care of a device they paid dearly for. This is an absolutely vile and reprehensible corporate behavior that gets excused only because they captured their regulators.
> They didn't just wake up yesterday and go "let's mess with those nerds."
Of course not! Instead, they just woke up yesterday and decided "let's screw our entire consumer base". What you've demonstrated here is another example of their dirty tactics. Frame this as a fight between them and the 'nerds' and pitch the consumers against each other. Let's just end the charade that this sort of overreach hurts only the nerds. It truly harms all consumers. People who are old enough to remember service shops and repairmen know what I'm talking about. But these crony capitalists have been at it for so long now that there is an entire generation who doesn't know what's possible with user serviceability. That's the sort of leaching that they've inflicted upon the society.
And, security is never an honest or acceptable excuse for restricting user freedoms. Anybody who argues that information security and user freedoms are mutually exclusive is out to sell techno snake oil. Yet another reprehensible behavior that needs to be reined in.
This is a rather bizare take. Pebble turned down a massive deal to keep doing their own thing. They sold cheap after they were going down because they had too mich staff, and not enough sales. Which Eric has said many times, and can even be found on his blog.
Then, when they were being sold, instead of shutting down the Pebble store and basically bricking all Pebble watches, they intentionally opened it up to make it possible for community support. Which is where Rebble stepped in.
Bizarre and disingenuous take. That really doesn't take into account Pebble's actions, much less their words.
What's bizarre? Per your own statement, "They sold cheap" as soon as they encountered some hardship, so it is quite understandable to not trust they'll behave differently this time around.
As far as I recall, it was sell cheap, or collapse with nothing. Garmin bought cheap and gutted it for the IP. It wasn't a sell to get paid, it was a sell or get nothing. It wasn't just hardship, it was the end.
> "They sold cheap" as soon as they encountered some hardship
Nobody is perfect, and running a small hardware startup is difficult. I'm not saying Eric and co are perfect, but it seems like he's been fairly forthright about the mistakes made at Pebble[1] and what Core aims to do better.
Shit happens, people make mistakes, Apple/Google decide to compete with you and/or lock you out of parts of their garden.
I'm not an expert by any means, but there isn't much to draw people to other games aside from curiosity. When it comes to Chess and Go, there is significant money on the line. Chess was also a proxy fight during the Cold War.
I'm personally a big fan of asymmetrical games. A game I've wanted to play but have never had the board to play it on is Unlur [0]. Arimaa [1] is another one with some history behind it that is uncommon.
It is very much appreciated that I don't have to make an account to play. That is one of the most annoying thing on sites like these to play games.
I also really like asymmetrical games. In particular the various Tafl[0] reconstructions. Some are unbalanced, but some are very balanced and fun to play as either attacker or defender. There are various versions with rule variations to accommodate various board sizes too.
I have not played Unlur. Looks like a cool hex variant. I like the initial phase where who plays white is decided. It is a neat way of working that out.
Thanks for the suggestions! Guest accounts are definitely a necessity. I had been looking at some asymmetrical games like Adugo and Viking Chess, myself.
Yeah I mean it's literally what the term "open source rugpull" means. Every business will ultimately renege on their open source promises. It's literally against their fiduciary duty to shareholders not to, once they've run out of actual growth ideas. Even if current management is idealistic, eventually, they will be replaced with "real leaders" who know that they need to make money.
But, ideally, it's not that big a deal, because the community (or even newer non-calcified businesses) can fork the last open source branch and continue development.
Unfortunately, with something as complex as an OS, that's incredibly difficult. It does seem regrettably unlikely that, for the foreseeable future, there will be no practically usable open-source phone OSes.
My only issue with Buckets is that the YNAB importer doesn't take into account that YNAB will take your overspending and take it from your next month's income. I have some bad habits that means I was really using YNAB as more of a financial tracker than an actually budget system. That's my own fault though. The envelope in question comes out to $-10k... That's all my own fault though. It just means I have to massage it into Bucket's system, or start a new budget.
reply