<![CDATA[It has been a year since I set up my System76 Merkaat with Linux Mint. In July of 2024 I migrated from ChromeOS and the Merkaat has been my daily driver on the desktop. A year later I have nothing major to report, which is the point. Despite the occasional unplanned reinstallation I have been enjoying the stability of Linux and just using the PC. This stability finally enabled me to burn bridges with mainstream operating systems and fully embrace Linux and open systems. I'm ready to handle the worst and get back to work. Just a few years ago the frustration of troubleshooting a broken system would have made me seriously consider the switch to a proprietary solution. But a year of regular use, with an ordinary mix of quiet moments and glitches, gave me the confidence to stop worrying and learn to love Linux. linux a href="https://remark.as/p/journal.paoloamoroso.com/my-first-year-since-coming-back-to-linux"Discuss.../a Email | Reply @amoroso@oldbytes.space !--emailsub--]]>

The mystery In the previous article, I briefly mentioned a slight difference between the ESP-Prog and the reproduced circuit, when it comes to EN: Focusing on EN, it looks like the voltage level goes back to 3.3V much faster on the ESP-Prog than on the breadboard circuit. The grid is horizontally spaced at 2ms, so … Continue reading Overanalyzing a minor quirk of Espressif’s reset circuit → The post Overanalyzing a minor quirk of Espressif’s reset circuit appeared first on Quentin Santos.

Explaining nil interface{} gotcha in Go A footgun In Go empty interface is an interface without any methods, typed as interface{}. A zero value of interface{} is nil: var v interface{} // compiler sets this to nil, you could explicitly write = nil if v == nil { fmt.Printf("v is nil\n") } else { fmt.Printf("v is NOT nil\n") } Try online This prints: v is nil. However, this sometimes trips people up: type Foo struct { } var v interface{} var nilFoo *Foo // implicilty initialized by compiler to nil if nilFoo == nil { fmt.Printf("nilFoo is nil.") } else { fmt.Printf("nilFoo is NOT nil.") } v = nilFoo if v == nil { fmt.Printf("v is nil\n") } else { fmt.Printf("v is NOT nil\n") } Try online This prints: nilFoo is nil. v is NOT nil. On surface level, this is wrong: t is a nil. We assigned a nil to v but it doesn’t equal to nil? How to check if interface{} is nil of any pointer type? func isNilPointer(i interface{}) bool { if i == nil { return false // interface itself is nil } v := reflect.ValueOf(i) return v.Kind() == reflect.Ptr && v.IsNil() } type Foo struct { } var pf *Foo var v interface{} = pf if isNilPointer(v) { fmt.Printf("v is nil pointer\n") } else { fmt.Printf("v is NOT nil pointer\n") } Try online Why There’s a reason for this perplexing behavior. nil is an abstract value. If you come from C/C++ or Java/C#, you might think that this is equivalent of NULL pointer or null reference. It isn’t. nil is a symbol that represents a zero value of pointers, channels, maps, slices. Logically interface{} combines type and value. You can think of it as a tuple (type, value). An uninitialized value of interface{} is a tuple without a type and value (no type, no value). In Go uninitialized value is zero value and since nil is an abstract value representing zero value for several types, it makes sense to use it for zero value of interface{}. So: zero value of interface{} is nil which is (no type, no value). When we assigned nilFoo to v, the value is (*Foo, nil). Are you surprised that (no type, no value) is not the same as (*Foo, nil)? To understand this gotcha, you have to understand two things. One: nil is an abstract value that only has a meaning in context. Consider this: var ch chan (bool) var m map[string]bool if ch == m { fmt.Printf("ch is equal to m\n") } Try online This snippet doesn’t even compile: Error:./prog.go:8:11: invalid operation: ch == m (mismatched types chan bool and map[string]bool). Both ch and m are nil but you can’t compare them because they are of different types. nil != nil because nil is an abstract concept, not an actual value. Two: nil value of interface{} is (no type, no value). Once you understand the above, you’ll understand why nil doesn’t compare to (type, nil) e.g. (*Foo, nil) or (map[string]bool, nil) or (int, 0) or (string, ""). Bad design or inevitable consequence of previous decisions? Many claim it’s a bad design. No-one describes what a better design would look like. Let’s play act a Go language designer. You’ve already designed concrete types, you came up with notion of zero value and created nil to denote zero value for pointers, channels, maps, slices. You’re now designing interface{} as a logical tuple of (type, value). The zero value is obviously (no type, no value). You have to figure how to represent the zero value. A different symbol for interface{} zero value Instead of using nil you could create a different symbol e.g. zeroInteface. You could then write: var v interface{} var v2 interface{} = &Foo{nil} var v3 interface{} = int(0) if v == zeroInteface { // this is true } if v2 == nil { // tihs is true } if v3 == nil { // is it true or not? } Is this a better design? I don’t think so. We don’t have zeroPointer, zeroMap, zeroChanel etc. so this breaks consistency. It sticks out like a sore zeroInterface. And v == nil is subtle. Not all values wrapped in an interface{} have zero value of nil. What should happen if you compare to (int, 0) given that 0 is zero value of int? Damn the consistency, let’s do what user expects You could ditch the strict logic of nil values and special case the if v == nil for interface{} to do what people superficially expect to happen. You then have to answer the question below: what happens when you do if (int, 0) == nil? The biggest issue is that you’ve lost ability to distinguish between (no type, no value) and (type, nil). They both compare to nil so how would you test for (no type, no value) but not (type, nil)? It doesn’t seem like a better design either. Your proposal Now that you understand the problem and seen two ideas for how to fix it, it’s your turn to design a better solution. I tried and the above 2 are the only ideas I had. We are boxed by existing notions of zero values and using nil to represent them. We could explore designs that re-think those assumptions but would that be Go anymore? It’s easy to complain that something is a bad design. It’s much harder, often impossible, to design something better.

I signed up for Hinge. Holy shit with the boosts. How does someone who works on this wake up every morning and feel okay about themselves? Similarly with the tip screens, Uber algorithm, all the zero sum bullshit using all the tricks of psychology to extract a little bit more from every interaction in society. Nudge. Nudge. NUDGE. Want to partake in normal society like buying a coffee, going on a date, getting a ride, paying a friend. Oh, there’s a middle man now. An evil ominous middleman using state of the art AI algorithms to extract just a little bit more from you. But eventually the market will fix this, right? People will feel sick of being manipulated and move elsewhere? Ahhh, but they see that coming long before you do. They have dashboards. Quick Jeeves, tune the AI to make people feel less manipulated. Give them a little bit more for now, we have to think about maximizing lifetime customer value here. Oh the AI already did this on its own? Jeeves you’ve been replaced! People perpetually on the edge. You want to opt out of this all you say? Good luck running a competitive business! Every metric is now a target. You better maximize engagement or you will lose engagement this is a red queen’s race we can’t afford to lose! Burn all the social capital, burn all your values, FEED IT ALL TO MOLOCH! Someday, people will have to realize we live in a society. What will it take? A complete self cannibalization to the point you can’t eat your own mouth? It sure as hell isn’t going to be people opting out, that’s a collective action problem you can’t solve. Democracy, haha, you think the algorithms will let you vote to kill them? Your vote is as decoupled from action as the amount Uber pays the driver is decoupled from the fare that you pay. There’s no reform here, there’s only revolution. Will it simply be a huge financial collapse? Or do we need World War 3? And even World War 3 is on a spectrum. Will mass starvation fix this? Or will the attitude of thinking it’s okay to manipulate others at scale persist even past that? He’s got his, and I’ve got mine… If you open a government S&P 500 account for everyone with $1,000 at birth that’ll pay their social security cause it like…goes up…wait who’s creating this value again? It’s not okay. Advertising is not okay. Price discrimination is not okay. Using big data, machine learning, and psychology to manipulate others at scale is not okay. But you aren’t going to learn this lesson until you have fed a huge majority of your customers to Moloch. Modern capitialism is wireheading. Release the hypnodrones. How many cans of Pepsi did you want them to consume an hour again?

I've never seen so many developers curious about leaving the Mac and giving Linux a go. Something has really changed in the last few years. Maybe Linux just got better? Maybe powerful mini PCs made it easier? Maybe Apple just fumbled their relationship with developers one too many times? Maybe it's all of it. But whatever the reason, the vibe shift is noticeable. This is why the future is so hard to predict! People have been joking about "The Year of Linux on the Desktop" since the late 90s. Just like self-driving cars were supposed to be a thing back in 2017. And now, in the year of our Lord 2025, it seems like we're getting both! I also wouldn't underestimate the cultural influence of a few key people. PewDiePie sharing his journey into Arch and Hyprland with his 110 million followers is important. ThePrimeagen moving to Arch and Hyprland is important. Typecraft teaching beginners how to build an Arch and Hyprland setup from scratch is important (and who I just spoke to about Omarchy). Gabe Newell's Steam Deck being built on Arch and pushing Proton to over 20,000 compatible Linux games is important. You'll notice a trend here, which is that Arch Linux, a notoriously "difficult" distribution, is at the center of much of this new engagement. Despite the fact that it's been around since 2003! There's nothing new about Arch, but there's something new about the circles of people it's engaging. I've put Arch at the center of Omarchy too. Originally just because that was what Hyprland recommended. Then, after living with the wonders of 90,000+ packages on the community-driven AUR package repository, for its own sake. It's really good! But while Arch (and Hyprland) are having a moment amongst a new crowd, it's also "just" Linux at its core. And Linux really is the star of the show. The perfect, free, and open alternative that was just sitting around waiting for developers to finally have had enough of the commercial offerings from Apple and Microsoft. Now obviously there's a taste of "new vegan sees vegans everywhere" here. You start talking about Linux, and you'll hear from folks already in the community or those considering the move too. It's easy to confuse what you'd like to be true with what is actually true. And it's definitely true that Linux is still a niche operating system on the desktop. Even among developers. Apple and Microsoft sit on the lion's share of the market share. But the mind share? They've been losing that fast. The window is open for a major shift to happen. First gradually, then suddenly. It feels like morning in Linux land!