ClassicOldSong

Maybe the world around you is just too kind to you.

> which we can all see in their licenses and in some file notices.

Not enough. If not they have lied to me, I won't care about the file-level attribution at all.

> I think the value should be what problem you are solving in a unique way

Yes, the code contain my own construction of a signal system implementation and my own algorithms that AI's can't get them shuffled or rewritten.

> which may put the other party off and force them not to collaborate with you

I actually assisted them pretty well at the beginning, until I discovered that they're lying. They reached me through NativeScript(which is proved to be another vitim of them later), and promise me that they're making a huge ambitious project that even Google and Meta failed.But they're making really really basic mistakes that even a noob should know where the problem is, and they didn't even try to address the problem themselves - I pointed out the problem, and they just refuse to investigate and debug, refusing it really hard. It's them that first starting to not cooperate.

> Also, Imagine someone added your own project to their hall of shame, you would no longer want to work with them would you?

This happens *after* their non-cooperation.

> which it seems if they where introduced by NativeScript.

NativeScript is also been lied to. They tell me that they plan to acquire NativeScript but failed at giving evidences that they have the ability to do so. When I asked NativeScript side about the acquision, they're shocked to hear this, and denied the possibility of being acquired as it is now a OpenJS Foundation project.

> Since they where introduced to you by a trusted party

That's their trick. They claim they worked for Nvidia, it tricks NativeScript and then they can use NativeScript's introduction to trick me. It is almost impossible to verify that they really worked for NV but it tricks people into beliving they're capable of something big, but actually they can't even debug such a simple problem on their own.

> Also you mentioned they Sponsored you in the hall of shame this is not the behavior of people with bad intentions.

It's also their trick. They want to get much more from me beyond the project itself, totally ignoring that I have my own projects and plan. Also the price they claim to pay for what I'm going to do is really really low, considering how ambitious the project is and how incapable themselves are.

I'm the victim and yes, this is not entirelly about AI. If you have read the hall of shame, you'll know that they tends to lie. If it was only someone tried to use my code as their basis and forgot to include the attribution, after my notice they added, it's totally not worth a "hall of shame", and I'm actually glad that someone finally appreciates my works and make them useful.

But the reality is, they lied to everyone and I'm a chained victim. I was introduced to him by NativeScript, and before that he didn't even know the existence of rEFui. Now rEFui has become the most important fundament of their entire project, clearly indicates that they want to get something for nothing from the very beginning.

Till now they still didn't answer me why they made the basic mistakes and how it was fixed.They avoid everything I ask about them unless I presure them very hard, they'll give a very vage respond that answers nothing.

> is it legal to start with MIT and change to Apache midway?

As the author of the project, I have every right to change the license to anything. But also, I didn't wash the history to hide that the project was MIT. Technically I can, but that actually violates MIT itself and I don't want to be someone that say one thing and do another.

> even with attribution clearly given

They won't until I presured them very hard. They also washed much more than my projects, but also without attribution until I notified those project's authors. Actually, till now the code are still not fully attributed, only few get a proper attribution. They have now extracted code blocks from my original project into many many small separated files (potentially trying to hide the origin even further), but the code logic are actually not changed at all. According to those license, each piece of code they extract should keep an attribution to my original project.

I have a backup of the deleted project that contains the entire commit history of how he laundered these projects, and I can provide the entire Discord message history if you need evidence of all my statements.

Currently reader only, written with my own framework rEFui. You can install it via Chrome/Edge and use it as a desktop app.

A HN Reader PWA demo with my own framework rEFui

https://github.com/ClassicOldSong/refui-hackernews-demo

It started as a demo only but it looks slick so I added standalone PWA to it to be installable as a desktop app. Now browsing HN feels even better!

You didn't get the point.

What I'm tring to do is making a "writable" solution with pure JavaScript, not needing to write a lot of `React.createElement` or something similar. I even got `attr` and `prop` proxied to the correct element when building, no need to extract them form arguments each time inside an element.

What's more, it's only less than 5kb without gzip.

I mixed hyperapp with hpyerscript.. My bad

In terms of "heavy", it's actually a problem with node's package management. Once I include test frameworks as dev dependencies, there's a high chance of installing my package will get the test framework together with it's whole bunch of dependencies installed as well - very unnecessary and time consuming.

1. This was just a POC, and there's yet no document. Testing may be added later but for there's only 400 lines of code, it could hardly go wrong. The demo itself acts as a proof of correctness as well.

2. Hyperapp actually does have some sort of compiling (at least parsing a string for a tag)

3. There're far more advanced usages that you may not aware of, so build function has no need to care about whether it's in test mode. More usage demos may come later.

4. I'm actually not a fan of writing redundant tests. IMO tests are more of a psychological comfort for users to see rather than a practical proof of robustness. Though it could gaurantee some sort of correctness, it won't cover how users want to use it. It's a waste of time to write a whole bunch of tests and run them every now and then.

5. I don't want to make this project "heavy", and I hate "heavy" projects.

Here I'd like to separate it from those frameworks that require a "compiler" to work...

Sorry for mistaken "vanilla" for different meanings...

No vdom, proxy based, self contained, and absolutely no need for any kind of parsing for templates.

The overall code composition is quite different if you take a closer look.