I love play some games, here's my pages about them:
My deep rock galactic config

My team fortress 2 writtings

Maybe I'll use some markdown formating there, because I think it's
more readable even in read mode.

Btw, all this pages were inspered by spoon's website.

Writting custom mountpoint type for Linux is too confusing.
I understand there's a lot of moving parts in Linux,
and VFS is so flexible, but I just can't understand sops vs inode operations.
Do I need Inodes for my virtual system or I can just use sops? I don't know.

If someone wants to write a filesystem, please, read the (Linux) docs!
Elixir bootlin is very helpfull too.

I love plan9.

And I love proof assistants too.

== Do we actually need dynamic binaries now?
We have KSM for memory compression and btrfs for storage compression, so
I should ask: is there any reason why we should keep dynamic linking?
All programs will have the same code in the filesystem, then it will be
compressed down to a one single instance (or even more). And when they
all will load into the memory, the KSM will link all that pages to the same
memory region without any overhead.
So I think there's no reason too use dynamic linking because all its
optimizations are useless and it just complicates things.

Still, static link everything anyway, it will be faster, robust and cool.

---

By the way, this site is a git repo which updates every time I push
something there. I find git-hooks cool.

---

Maybe GNU/Hurd was right and microkernel is the way to go. KTLS could be
good if handshake was made in kernel, OSS was the only reasanoble way audio
subsystem could go and fuse api is better than VFS, but the gap between
kernel space and user space is too big for us to have useful APIs in
programs. Even audio mixing is done in the userspace because "kernel attack
vector must be minimal". The usefulness of the kernel must be minimal too,
I guess?

---

Here goes my random stash of long term ideas:
Link