464 karma · joined March 2, 2008
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/alec; my proof: https://keybase.io/alec/sigs/EwhDB5ZFYHetGQT4QBxryMKudydFlHx6vfI2ZbYaXTY ]
hnchat:M7diobfazxWsK0TZ9aVm
I've never heard that before and it would be really surprising, given that Python's builtin dict is used for everything from local symbol to object field lookup. Do you have more information?
First result is good: pkg.go.dev/go/parser
Second result looks like a content farm: golangdocs.com/golang-parser-package
Third result looks like a valid Chinese search result, but it's a duplicate of the first result and also _very_ weird that it would rank that highly: golang.cm/pkg/go_parser.htm
Then the next two results are content farms: golangexample.com/tag/parser/ golangexample.com/a-dead-simple-parser-package-for-go/
Then a valid result from a low-starred GH project: github.com/prataprc/goparsec
Then a good result: blog.gopheracademy.com/advent-2014/parsers-lexers/
Then a random seemingly unrelated academic paper: www.arxiv.org/abs/1505.08075
Then a valid result from a high-starred GH project: github.com/alecthomas/participle
Then another content farm: awesomeopensource.com/projects/golang/parser
kagi also has a bunch of the content farms, but the ranking is better IMO. Good luck!
Definitely agreed.
> Looking at https://flossbank.com/, this seems like just what you describe. I don't know how it works exactly, though.
That looks ... related, but I _detest_ that it relies on injecting ads into package managers. It's also not extensible.
I think an open source tool would be preferable so that incentives don't get skewed by for-profit motives.
I would also prefer if the payments didn't go through a single company. Paying developers through GitHub Sponsors, Patreon, Flattr, or whatever their preferred mechanism is.
I also don't think the problem it solves gives the greatest benefit for the amount of work required. I think making it easier for companies to pay open source contributors is the right approach. For any company that builds software, finding and paying the open source projects they use is a massive amount of work and there's nothing that helps with that. If there was much less friction to paying maintainers, more companies would do it.
I would love to see a tool that, given a pool of money, will collect dependencies from projects in any language (extensible), find the authors (git commit history, etc.), find where they accept contributions (extensible), and pay them, based on both computed and hand crafted weights.
But if you'd like I'd be happy to take a look at some of the problems you're encountering. I'm @alecthomas on the Gophers Slack or Twitter, feel free to DM me. No guarantees, but it sounds very unusual for an additional test to consume 15 minutes of setup.
https://apps.apple.com/au/app/phone-protection/id1282949977
Pretty clearly fake reviews, what it provides seems like a complete scam, in app subscriptions - ticks all the boxes from that article!
Four years on and it's still happening. Pretty incredible. Apple largely justifies its 30% cut as providing a curated experience, which is hard to reconcile with this reality.
I'm struggling to understand what the rationale _for_ doing it is though. Maybe it's to avoid an import cycle?
No mention of "Android" or "Smart", but it does do DVR of some sort, so it's not 100% clear.
term xterm-256color> Status > Nobody is working on this right now. You shouldn't rely on it unless you're willing to take over development yourself.
My underlying argument is that a strong free press must be maintained and that the reductionist argument that legitimate news sources and JoeRandomYouTuber should be treated identically is naive at best.
> Instead it goes directly to the big publishers who cut journalists while increasing the salary of people like Andrew Bolt (who is so far removed from a journalist it is objectionable).
The relationship between the rise of populist/sensationalist media and that of the Internet/social media/Google is inextricably linked. Traditional news sources found their revenue declining and so chased whatever attracted consumers, including sensationalist cretins like Bolt. Google should accept responsibility for this.
To be clear, I'm not arguing that the ACCC's proposal is the perfect solution to the underlying problem, but the status quo does need to change. At least they're doing something.
I legitimately don't understand this point of view. Original reporting of the kind that keeps politicians and corporations in line costs money; investigative journalists aren't cheap. What YouTuber gives you this kind of depth? Will the world be a better place without the Fourth Estate?