HNHacker News
TopNewBestAskShowJobs

dotandgtfo

233 karma · joined March 26, 2018

submissionscomments
dotandgtfo··on Some more things about Django I've been enjoying
I found parts of the Django RAPID architecture [0] to speak to me. It specifically advocates for just one app. Here's a part of the justification.

> Slicing up your project into apps is something that must be done early, often at the very start of development. This is a simple result of the fact that you need somewhere to put the code you're writing as you go along. In the early days and weeks of work on a new codebase, manage.py startapp gets used a lot, as the high-level structure of the project starts to take shape.

> The issue here is that at this early stage, you often don't really know enough about what the project's final form will look like to correctly draw the boundaries around the apps. Functionality that feels separate at first often becomes deeply entangled, and features that sound similar end up sharing little. Over time, the key concepts and models in your system become clear, and if these are colocated with unrelated or irrelevant code, the waters of the project become muddy and maintenance becomes difficult - before the project is even in production!

> While it is technically possible to migrate models between apps, Django doesn't make it easy, particularly if the models in question have foreign key or many-to-many relationships with other models. And if you think about it, it's not really a technical limitation of the sort that could easily be solved with a PR into Django. It's a conceptual problem: if migrations are a historical record of changes to models, and migrations are encapsulated in the same app as those models, then moving a model to a different app necessarily creates a historical coupling between the two apps that shouldn't really exist.

[0] https://www.django-rapid-architecture.org/structure/

dotandgtfo··on My Google Workspace account suspension
This is one of the goals of the digital services act.
dotandgtfo··on Reddit User Uncovers Who Is Behind Meta's $2B Lobbying for Age Verification Tech
> We regularly see legislation that is being rammed and rushed through in spite of vocal opposition.

This implies that regulation is codified. The clear pattern of EU digital regulation doomerism is generally pointing at shitty proposals which aren't approved and codified in law.

Digital omnibus is another proposal.

If "rammed and rushed laws" is legitimately a widespread issue, you should be able to find a good example of something codified which is not just a proposal?

I'm not saying we don't have to fight. But vocal opposition to proposals which ultimately don't make it into law is the system working exactly as intended.

dotandgtfo··on Reddit User Uncovers Who Is Behind Meta's $2B Lobbying for Age Verification Tech
They're proposals by a minority. I'd like to see it go to see chat control go to grave permanently, but I'd also rather not that the democratic system allows for the permanent barring an impossible to define class of proposals from even being proposed. Or do you have other solutions?
dotandgtfo··on Meta Platforms: Lobbying, dark money, and the App Store Accountability Act
What examples of this do you have in recent years (post 2016)? The clearest example of lobbying (chat control) has repeatedly been struck down.
dotandgtfo··on Breaking Free
Considering the absolute deluge of politicians and celebrities allegedly promoting financial scams on norwegian Facebook my hunch is absolutely not.
dotandgtfo··on Amazon plunge continues $1T wipeout as AI bubble fears ignite sell-off
I've always found it confusing how run of the mill SaaS trades at multiples assuming decades of doing business. The amount of change in software businesses has been massive and being able to run a successful software business even for 15 years from 2010-2025 requires a great deal of strategy and foresight and more likely than not that's not enough. Considering how these dynamics have been accelerating as technology accelerates it just seemed so off that the market was landing on a 20-30x multiples for software businesses that don't have much moat (e.g. swathes of B2B CRUD apps).
dotandgtfo··on X For You Feed Algorithm
Access to read 1 million posts through the X API costs $5000/month. Enterprise access to their API costs $42 000 per month.

Multiple researchers are being told by X that they must pay this fee to get access[1][2][3].

X has recently been fined for not providing this access to researchers. Both for the organic engagement, and for paid advertising. [4]

The pricing of X's API is exorbitant and orders of magnitude higher than arguably higher quality datasets like Reddit. One million posts through the Reddit API costs $2.40.

The pricing scheme is obviously not value based and is clearly designed to limit data access to researchers. As users here note, studying recommender systems requires studying the inputs and outputs of the system. Platforms are rightly not mandated to present the inputs due to privacy concerns. But they are mandated to make the outputs available. And they aren't. "Open sourcing" their algorithm is not a replacement for this, it's an obvious a ploy to present themselves as transparent.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.07340

[2] https://devcommunity.x.com/t/academic-twitter-access-is-dead...

[3] https://devcommunity.x.com/t/apply-academic-research-access/...

[4] https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_25_...

dotandgtfo··on X For You Feed Algorithm
This clearly has the goal of muddying the water of the DSA transparency requirements. It's an opaque way of trying to mislead users into believing that X is being transparent while not being so at all.

They pretend to be transparent about their algorithms while denying researchers access to their API through exorbitant pricing and severely limited quotas.

dotandgtfo··on The Post-American Internet
There's a clear winner of surveillance in the set of the US government, US companies, and the EU government and EU companies.

Not only is the EU miles behind the US, the US is accelerating faster towards more surveillance. Historically PRISM and the US Cloud act. More recently DOGE's recent actions in centralising data and a new crop of private enterprises working on surveillance tech like CCTV facial recognition.

I don't see the federal government applying any breaks on this development. However, I note some states are. But we do see clear attempts from the EU attempt to attempt to curb this. E.g. parts of the AI Act.

While I'm not enjoying the development certain factions are pushing through in the EU either, it is hyperbole to say that the EU is attempting to make a surveillance state, especially in this context.

dotandgtfo··on US sanctions EU government officials behind the DSA
Really abhorrent how the current US government is spinning this into their tried and true "free speech" crusade despite it being mostly irrelevant. The DSA's core goal is transparency, shown clearly in the X ruling.

> The ‘blue checks’ charge is about consumer deception. X changed the rules about how it does verification in a way that allowed impersonation and scams to flourish. [...] As the Commission put it, the DSA “clearly prohibits online platforms from falsely claiming that users have been verified, when no such verification took place.”

> The ‘ads transparency’ charge stems from the DSA’s requirement that platforms must maintain a public archive showing what ads the platform ran, who paid for them, and other information. X fell drastically short of meeting this requirement

> The third thing the EU penalized X for is not giving researchers better access to public data. This enforcement is not about the DSA’s more famous and controversial requirement for platforms to hand over internal data. It’s just about information that was already publicly available on X’s site and app.

It's clear why the tech monopolies want to keep their secrets in the dark. There is a democratic consensus that what they're pulling either is illegal - or should be illegal. E.g. Scam advertisements, overt editorial practices by selective (de)amplification and/or monetization and looking the other way about bots and third-parties leveraging their systems for spreading political propaganda.

Transparency is their enemy. Free speech is their irrelevant but emotion-laden argument. Europeans see straight through it - the questions is, do the Americans?

dotandgtfo··on OpenAI needs to raise at least $207B by 2030
That's a marketing role, not a product role.
dotandgtfo··on Iommi – your first pick for a Django power chord
Thanks, looks interesting. I may play around with it.

I think what happened was that I landed on your page. Read the landing page, which only contained code. Scrolled to the top and clicked "install in minutes" and was unexpectedly redirected down the page. Then I clicked into github and didn't click on the forms/tables hyperlinks there.

I think what I'm saying is primarily that I'm lazy.

Secondly, your landing page is too code oriented and does not show off any UI and your anchor link (which typically links into documentation) short-circuited my search for a docs page.

I think you would have gotten considerably more upvotes on this post if you show the product off more on the landing page. Despite the obvious lack of effort I put into learning your product, most people who clicked on this link today did even less.

No shade or anything. Again, the product looks nice now that I've seen it in the docs.

dotandgtfo··on Iommi – your first pick for a Django power chord
Please add more examples or a demo page or something. The gif and picture in the github repo is the single most descriptive part of your documentation, but a gif is terrible UX and a picture doesn't show off interactivity. This should be front and center on your landing page.

This may be useful for me, but I'm not going to bother setting up a test Django environment to test this just to find out that it isn't what I expected.

dotandgtfo··on Australia Post halts transit shipping to US as 'chaotic' tariff deadline looms
What a horrible take. I feel compelled to say that in my experience people in northern Europe can empathize with and separate the population from a dysfunctional two-party political system captured by capital.
dotandgtfo··on EU Commission finds Temu in breach of online platform rules
That would make more sense if the law was limiting speech. But it has been clearly designed to not give governments the power to remove content/services/products that are not illegal.

Content which is not directly illegal is covered by the voluntary code of conduct on disinformation [1]. If you can point out to me a provision which allows the governments to force platforms to remove content which is not explicitly illegal I'll be very impressed. Because it ain't there.

It does say that algorithms should be tweaked to not spread "damaging disinformation" - e.g. reduce amplification of it. And it does say that these platforms shouldn't be allowing users who create disinformation to monetize their content like the good old Macedonian troll farms [2]

But in the end - there are no sanctions. These are guidelines. And if platforms consistently ignore these and it turns into a systemic harm then fines can start piling up. But never for a single piece of content - just a systemic malpractice.

Yes. It's a clever law because it doesn't give governments the power to remove content which is not illegal. But it does still force platforms to do something about their incentives they create for third-parties around content.

And no. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater and letting foreign companies self-regulate illegal content is frankly ludicrous considering their stellar track record of not giving a shit because it's the cheapest option.

[1] https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/code-conduc...

[2] https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/ps-political-science...

dotandgtfo··on EU Commission finds Temu in breach of online platform rules
Thanks to some frankly amazing American propaganda there's a surge of interest in free speech in Europe. Funnily the same regulations that aim to remove toxic products, make platforms more transparent, and hold platforms more accountable for breaking the law all are being attacked for encroaching on free speech.

I don't see it succeeding.

It's hard to explain just how much shit these digital platforms pull when serving a small market they don't care much about. People are rightfully pissed. It's seeped deeply into the public sphere the last ~8 years. Much more than I imagined possible even 2-3 years ago. Doubly so with the recent merging of the Republican party and technology leaders.

While Temu is in a class of its own - it's obvious that hyperscaling and postponing QC, moderation and compliance with a very American approach to safe harbour laws will not continue being the premier way to skirt laws for much longer.

dotandgtfo··on Happy 20th Birthday, Django
I'm newish to Django. Been using it for about a year. I had some experience with React earlier. But I'm more of a data engineer.

Django Cotton [1] scratched my itch fully. Very composable. Being able to pass HTML to components (E.g. you create a modal which takes a content slot) removed so many of the warts I felt using the standard Django templating.

It's not JSX, but it plays well with Django and makes it feel like I can create a real design system of components without a ton of JINJA.

https://django-cotton.com/

dotandgtfo··on Apple vs the Law
> I would argue the opposite: It actually makes European businesses worth off by continuing to make its regulatory environment so complex only massive companies like big tech or Europe's legacy players have the resources to comply.

Are you arguing that 27 different sets of laws was a better approach? That these countries would just gladly lie down and never regulate the societal-level harms, systemic lawbreaking, and massive infringement of privacy across the board? I don't think so.

For a moment the political system in the US seemed to get to the same conclusions as the EU under Bidens FTC and anti-trust cases. But the conclusions of that remain to be seen.

dotandgtfo··on Second study finds Uber used opaque algorithm to dramatically boost profits
I think the issue arises from them doing this on the supply side of the market as well. Discriminating offers to drivers in order to prioritise people willing to drive for less. Or just finding ways to pay people less through algorithmic means.

It's not like people were very happy about their "disruption" of the job market to begin with.

dotandgtfo··on OpenAI slams court order to save all ChatGPT logs, including deleted chats
None of those use cases are broadly thought of as legitimate interest and explicitly require some sort of consent in Europe.

Session cookies and profiles on logged in users is where I see most companies stretching for legitimate interest. But cross service data sharing and persistent advertising cookies without consent are clearly no bueno.

dotandgtfo··on "Europe Is Jailing People for Online Speech," by Prof. Yascha Mounk
The extrapolation to the entire Europe from a set of extreme outliers (Germany, understandably so, the UK, less so) is grossly disingenuous.
dotandgtfo··on Open source Google Analytics replacement
Plausible, Fathom, Umami and the others all do cookie-less tracking too. Why don't you add an option to track through cookies? Most serious businesses have the consent for putting analytics cookies there, especially if it's a first-party cookie. This will differentiate you and instantly make this a more serious option for self-hosters who want simple but reliable tracking. Especially if you can set this as a serverside first-party HTTPS cookie.

Alternatively, add an identify() call and let others roll their own solution for this.

Then I would actually trust your retention numbers.

Great stuff though! Impressive launch.

dotandgtfo··on Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order
> You are welcome to define all news you dislike as ragebait but that's clearly not an argument, it's just a "lame value judgement".

> Meanwhile the injustice upon innocent people remains, and the existence of it harms society itself greatly via other paths as well.

Your hyperbole is exasperating. I'll pass.

dotandgtfo··on Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order
I don't enjoy making others pay for my entertainment. What a petty way to frame the discussion.

You'll find broad/majority support for state broadcasters in Northern Europe. The business model of for-profit digital news production is not economically viable outside of certain niches or clickbait/ragebait. Doubly so in small countries with just a few million citizens.

Free, broadly available, non-commercial journalism is a critical part of our society. Some would say paywalling a baseline of local knowledge constricts civic participation and is immoral. But that's a lame value judgement and should rightfully be dismissed.

dotandgtfo··on Corporation for Public Broadcasting Statement Regarding Executive Order
Your lighthouse parable is still highly relevant for public broadcasters when you consider that modern public broadcasting heavily subsidize expensive original reporting that for-profit newspapers are free to and happy to republish.

A core reason for having a robust public broadcasting system is that it lifts the quality of the entire information ecosystem.

Saying this as a Norwegian. I happily pay around 200/300 dollars a year for it out of my taxes.

dotandgtfo··on Kim Dotcom's extradition to the U.S. given green light by New Zealand
If we remove the digital aspect of it. What do you think the US would do if Kim let anonymous people send him DVDs and albums over snailmail and he would burn and mail them to anyone who requested it?

Personally I find safe harbour arguments very weak when the service provider allows anonymous sharing.

dotandgtfo··on Automakers Sold Driver Data for Pennies, Senators Say
Could it be this Norwegian one from NRK?

https://nrkbeta.no/2020/12/03/my-phone-was-spying-on-me-so-i...

The original in Norwegian https://www.nrk.no/norge/xl/avslort-av-mobilen-1.14911685 has some nice visualizations.

dotandgtfo··on Show HN: SQLite Database Explorer
DuckDB support would be great!
dotandgtfo··on How to get stuff repaired when the manufacturer don't wanna: take 'em to court
I don't know about Sweden particularly but in Norway "Forbrukerkjøpsloven" [0] gives you up to a 5 year warranty on any items which are obviously meant to last for at least that long. For instance, shoes have a two years warranty, but a laptop or most kitchen appliances have an automatic 5 year warranty which cannot be waived.

I'm not that knowledgeable about all the details here, but I've done it once for a PSU which stopped working after four years.

[0] https://www.forbrukerradet.no/cause-for-complaint/

Page 1 of 4Next →