weli

The script doesn’t self-update unless you actually want it to via an explicit flag.

It doesn’t have any features other than installing the latest release from the codex GitHub repo and updating it, and I don’t want it to have more features than that. This is not meant to replace any codex installation via a package manager, if you have a package manager where codex is available then by all means install it through that.

Maybe its the tism but I also read that sentence as neutral. You expected very little and you got very little. Why would that be positive or negative? Maybe it should be positive because you got what you were expecting? But I would call getting what you expect something neutral, if you expected little and got a lot then that would be positive. If you expected a lot and got little then its negative. But if you expected little and got little the most clear outcome is that its a neutral statement. Am I missing something?

The problem is that people who are depressed often don't have the energy to change their lifestyle to start exercise, which requires significant effort.

That's why psychiatrists will suggest antidepressants or Electroconvulsive therapy (in extreme cases of depression) because clients are unable to help themselves.

> I started programming when I was seven because a machine did exactly what I told it to, felt like something I could explore and ultimately know, and that felt like magic. I’m fifty now, and the magic is different, and I’m learning to sit with that.

Don't take this the wrong way but this is more of an age thing rather than a technology advancement thing.

Kids growing up nowadays that are interested in computers grow up feeling the same magic. That magic is partly derived from not truly understanding the thing you are doing and creating a mental "map" by yourself. There is nothing intrinsic to computing nowadays that makes it less magic than fiddling around with config.sys, in 50 years there will be old programmers reminiscing of "Remember when all new models were coming out every few months and we could fiddle around with the vector dimensionality and chunking length to get the best of gpt-6.2 RAG? Those were the times".

I'm glad that you are lucky enough to never have had to choose between filling your gas tank or eating. It's sadly the state many people live in.

$1 might not be a lot to you, but in some countries that's the daily wage. Even in rich countries one dollar for some might be the difference between eating or not eating that day.

Paywalling without any regional pricing consideration it's just going to incentivize people from poor countries to not participate in your project. Maybe that's okay for you but it's something to consider.

> this is all true, and yes, this is interesting. But there are so many other questions around this tech. Let's not rush into it and mess everything up.

That's a really nice fictitious conversation but in my experience "anti-ai" people would be prone to say "This is stupid LLM's will never be able to write complex code and attempting to do so is futile". If your mind is open to explore how LLM's will actually write complex software then by definition you are not "anti".

I don't see how this is going to work. 'It sounds like AI' is not a good metric whatsoever to remove content.

Nice. I love astro and I love cloudflare. Most of my static pages are that stack.

Agreed

When did hacker news become so right wing that saying the French revolution was a good societal movement is seen as "glorifying mass executions"? lmao

> It shouldn't be hard to print pieces that can snap together

I have some news for you. Lego piece tolerance is nuts. I think it is down to 2 micrometers. You can't achieve that in consumer 3d printers.

Now, you can make something that kinda works like lego but it wont have the structural integrity for advanced builds.

For samsung users I think good lock can do something similar.

Unrelated, but I want to move from a Google account youtube feed to something a bit more client-side where I have the control but my main problem is the YouTube recommendation algorithm.

I feel like after a decade and a half google knows pretty well what I like and what I'm interested in. I built that homepage brick by brick.

Whenever I tried other youtube clients or ungoogled alternatives the recommendations were all really generic and not that good. Of course I won't find something that matches the real deal, but at least I want to:

1. Steer away from viral content, aka Mr Beast videos or whatever. 2. Have discoverability of youtube videos I would be interested in but that I'm not subscribed to yet.

To this day I still find new channels or videos I'm really interested in on my recommended feed.

I agree with you so much. Great parenting is education, not restriction. I don't want my kid to not talk to strangers because I told him its something bad that you shouldn't do. He won't talk to strangers because he understands the implications and what can happen.

A kid with no education and restricted access will just find a way to do whatever he wants to do. A kid with good education and unrestricted access will know to steer away from bad stuff and talk to adults when he finds something strange.

One of the proudest moments of my grandfather (in my household, he was the most tech savy) was when I found a way to "bypass" an restriction program around age 11. From then on he decided I "outgrew" this kind of limits and just gave me unlimited access to the family computer and the internet.

But years later he confessed, the "click" moment for him was not that I could bypass the restriction, but that I trusted him enough to show him and that I self-reported the situation. And this is pure education and has nothing to do with restrictions.

I read so many parents here that want to "educate" their children but want to offload that work to some service or program instead of putting the work in. You prefer spending 5 hours configuring your child's nintendo switch rather than sitting down with him for 1 hour to explain to him what he can encounter on the internet, how he should behave and react and building the bond needed for him to trust you enough to come to you when needed.

Google does "sell" your data to other Alphabet companies except they call it "partnership" or "strategic sharing" and it should be completely illegal and be called data brokerage too. Same with Meta.

There is a reason the FTC and DOJ force this companies to break up, except they have hordes of lawyers and the law will always be catching up to reality so it doesn't do much in this day and age.

How are they going to enforce this? "No officer see this is an orange pi"

I wonder the same. I think a language like pascal is more semantically rich than C-like languages. Something like:

   unit a;

   interface

     function bar(something: Integer): Integer;

   implementation

     uses b;

     var
       foo: Boolean;

     function bar(something: Integer): Integer;
      begin
        repeat
           Result := b.code(something);
        until Result <> 0;
      end;

    end.

Probably holds more semantically significant tokens than the C-counterpart.

But with LLM's the problem's gotta be training data. But if there was as much training data in Pascal as there is in C it would be pretty cool to see benchmarks, I have a hunch Pascal would do better.

(Sorry for the bad pascal I haven't programmed in ages)

Yep! Something a bit counterintuitive on circuit design is that dedicated transistors will always beat reusing existing components. If we do reuse existing components like ALUs, multipliers, or state machines, we save on chip area but pay the penalty in clock cycles. Your approach was the extreme version of this tradeoff. You essentially unrolled the entire dictionary lookup into pure combinatorial logic (well, with registers for the input characters). One clock cycle latency because you weren't doing any sequential searching, comparing, or state machine transitions just racing electrons through logic gates.

I don't know. I kinda assume most language families are somewhat land contiguous and I take indo-european as the exception that confirms the rule. That's why austronesian is so interesting.

Austronesian language family is wild. How could a language family be spoken both in New Zealand and Madagascar blows my mind. At least indo-european is connected by land, but an entire language family that spans thousands of kilometers across sea sounds something straight up from a Tolkien book.

I think you are missing the point of legal vs societal obligations and your analogy is equally bad. Minio's sold you this free light bulb and they also freely offered the service to upgrade it to the newest version every time a new lightbulb was released. There are many light bulb brands out there, some paid, some free, most of them also offer the service to upgrade the lightbulb automatically, even the free ones.

Then Minio decided to disable the feature to upgrade the lightbulb automatically, the code to update it is still there, they just don't want to do it anymore. Conveniently there is a Minio+ enterprise plan that has this feature. But hey! they tell you that you can easily set up your own server to update your lightbulb automatically. And most enterprise clients or people who have Minio lightbulbs in their office will do that.

But for single enthusiasts who don't have a server because they are just running a Minio lightbulb in their shed it's a bad situation, because if they knew this from the beginning they would have gone with another free lightbulb that updated automatically.

In short: Minio has the legal right to do whatever they want, people using minio have the right to be pissed. It's an all around bad publicity stunt and if I was a Minio investor I would really wonder why they are trying to piss off their loyal user base for a quick buck.

> There is absolutely nothing malicious or suspicious about deciding not to provide docker images or binaries. Doing so does not hide or guard you against CVE's, which are entirely unrelated to such optional processes.

Agree. But that's not my point. If you start an oss project from scratch and you don't want to provide builds that's fine.

If you start your oss project, provide public docker images since the beginning, start getting traction, create a commercial scheme for you to monetize the project and then suddenly make a rug pull on the public builds; that is indeed irresponsible, and borderline malicious when you do it without: 1. sufficient warning time. 2. after a recent cve.

Is it malicious? I don't know. I prefer to believe in Hanlon's razor. Is it irresponsible? 100% yes.

When you always published and built Docker images for the public you are creating an expectation, people will rely on that and will chose your software based on that expectation.

You suddenly deciding that you won't be offering updated Docker images especially after a CVE and with no prior notice (except a hidden commit 4 days ago that updated the README) is approaching malicious-level actions.

If they truly cared about their community and still wanted to go through the decision of not offering public docker builds the responsible thing to do is offer a warning period, start adding notices in the repo (gh and docker) and create an easy migration path, even endorse or help some community members who would be fine with taking care of the public builds of the image.

But no, they introduced the change, made no public statement about it, waited for someone to notice this, offered no explanation and went silent. After a huge CVE. Irresponsible.

> Maybe you have some better suggestions on who this award should have gone to? Of all the candidates, I guess in the end she was seen as having done a lot, but in your mind she've done nothing, which means you're thinking about some other person who did more?

I think if there are no suitable candidates the award should be skipped. Like it has been skipped many years for the same reasons. This would send a more powerful message about how fucked up the state of the world is rather than giving it to someone just for the sake of it.

They are not my standards. They are the Nobel Peace committee's standards. And I do agree Nobel Peace prizes are purely performative, but this one alongside Barack Obama has been one of the most performative ones I can remember.

I'm not saying that she isn't a good politician or that what she is doing is not a step in the right direction. I personally like her. All I'm saying is that she hasn't accomplished anything meaningful to merit the Nobel prize.

That's like giving the Nobel in physics to someone that has worked all their life publishing papers but they all have been refuted and proven wrong.

I don't think "prize" for the merit of being relentless in their fight for publishing physics papers is merited, maybe a different honor, but Peace Nobels should be given to - and i quote -:

"to the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between nations, for the abolition or reduction of standing armies and for the holding and promotion of peace congresses."

Don't get me wrong. She has firmly opposed maduro and is a beacon of hope for many in Venezuela but she hasn't accomplished anything meaningful yet? She is just a career politician that just happens to be in the opposition of the venezuelan goverment when Maduro (a dictator) is in power. But she hasn't done anything extraordinary to merit the award.