The voting is legitimate; there's no evidence that the voting is from sockpuppets or anyone else connected with the team/project. We always monitor the discussion and the voting, and if the discussion is not of sufficient quality, the post will not stay on the front page for long.
shrug I upvoted, I'd already seen the Pion announcement on Twitter and read the link. I'm also a regular listener of Andon FM, so I'm interested in what they do and it's nice to finally sneak a peak at the interface that was driving things behind the scenes
Listening to the radio stations certainly gives an insight into the various failure modes. Some of them are just failure modes that any business would encounter once they make contact with the scale of the real world.
I know these sorts of meta comments are often frowned upon, but good god do I hate this approach of fading in every individual element on scroll down the page. It's one of my biggest pet peeves of "modern" web sites.
yes! and giving current scientific research on reading efficiency pointing towards fixed pages being much better than scroll, the whole web is screwed but these fancy sites... a big merda
As a Fastmail user for both personal use, as well as for my business, the best thing I can say about them is that I haven't thought about them in...a decade?
We built a Discord integration so that new emails to our support address would ping us in a Discord channel using the JMAP API. It's only failed to work once that I can recall - and that ultimately ending up being on Discord - not Fastmail.
Just rock solid service all around with no bullshit.
There are a ton of brands and I got a random knock off so I can only report on that one. I would recommend putting some thought and research into what size you think you'll need. I got a 58mm printer and I'm realizing it's quite narrow.
Also you might want to consider the size of the printer itself. I bought a open-box new printer off ebay and the seller's photos didn't give any sense of scale. I was surprised how big this "mini" printer is. It's about the standard size of a printer you'd see at a grocery store, so I don't think I'll be keeping it on my desk.
In the US my impression is that printers marketed with a size in inches are quality printers from reputable brands but bottom feeding Chinese printers are marketed with a size in mm.
There are many similar models from other companies; however, while Bluetooth is advertised as its primary connection, this one also has a USB port, which works with Linux!
Bluetooth also works, but it was too unreliable for me. I ended up using Claude to write a small CLI tool which prints via raw USB: rock solid and simple.
I'd very much recommend a second-hand Epson TM-M30 if you can pick one up for cheap. It prints at 203dpi and can output true grayscale (multi tone) without dithering.
I have one of those AliExpress ones that look like a white box with a colored circle on one side, stylized to look like a cat. They go for a few bucks used in the secondary market. I wrote a simple webapp for it to avoid using the bulky official app, it uses the web Bluetooth API (Chrome only sadly): https://purrint.github.io/
Some people already did that, there were bits of Python and Processing code lying on GitHub I found by searching the Bluetooth device name. I just had to convert that to use web Bluetooth API and build the app around that.
I got the Phomemo M02 Pro and have liked it alright for printing out playtest cards on-the-fly. Claude did manage to replicate an integration someone else did the hard work of working out w/ dithering etc, but the native app's fidelity & speed has been better for my use-case, at least
For daily to-dos a generic 58mm Chinese ones is probably enough. For pen and paper stuff I highly recommend going with anything 80mm, as 58mm can be too narrow...
Search "58mm usb thermal receipt printer esc/pos" on Amazon and you will find various generic models
We use GitLab on the daily. Roughly 200 repos pushing to ~20 on any given day. There have been a few small, unpublished outages that we determined were server side since we have a geo-distributed team, but as a platform seems far more stable than 5-6 years ago.
My only real current complaint is that the webhooks that are supposed to fire in repo activity have been a little flaky for us over the past 6-8 months. We have a pretty robust chatops system in play, so these things are highly noticeable to our team. It’s generally consistent, but we’ve had hooks fail to post to our systems on a few different occasions which forced us to chase up threads until we determined our operator ingestion service never even received the hooks.
FWIW, GitHub is also unreliable with webhooks. Many recent GH outages have affected webhooks.
They are pretty good, in my experience, at *eventually* delivering all updates. The outages take the form of a "pause" in delivery, every so often... maybe once every 5 weeks?
Usually the outages are pretty brief but sometimes it can be up to a few hours. Basically I'm unaware of any provider whose webhooks are as reliable as their primary API. If you're obsessive about maintaining SLAs around timely state, you can't really get around maintaining some sort of fall-back poll.
> you can't really get around maintaining some sort of fall-back poll.
This has been my experience with GitHub Actions as well, which I imagine rely on the same underlying event system as webhooks.
Every so often, an Action will not be triggered or otherwise go into the void. So for Actions that trigger on push, I usually just add a cron schedule to them as well.
Completely agree on all points. We've had dual remotes running on a few high traffic repos pushing to both GitLab and GitHub simultaneously as a debug mechanism and our experiences mirror yours.
Jesus, that's a staggering figure to me coming from senior developers. I guess I'm the odd one out here, but ChatGPT is nothing more than an index of Stack Overflow (and friends) for me. It's essentially replaced Googling, but once I get the answer I need I'm still just slinging code like an asshole. Copying the output wholesale from any of these LLMs just seems crazy to me.
If you’re using ChatGPT directly for work then I believe that you are doing it so profoundly wrong, at this point, that you’re going to make really incorrect assumptions.
As we have all observed, the models get things wrong, and if you’re wrong 5% of the time, then ten edits in you’re at 60-40. So you need to run them in a loop where they’re constantly sanity checking themselves—-linting, styling, typing and testing. In other words; calling tools in a loop. Agents are so much better than any other approach it’s comical precisely because they’re scaffolding to let models self-correct.
This is likely somewhat domain-specific; I can’t imagine the models are that great at domains they haven’t seen much code in, so they probably suck at HFT infrastructure for example, though they are decent at reading docs by this point. There’s also a lot of skill in setting up the right documentation, testing structure, interfaces, etc etc etc to make the agents more reliable and productive (fringe benefit; your LLM-wielding colleagues actually write docs now, even if they’re full of em-dashes and emoji). You also need to be willing to let it write a bunch of code, look at it, work out why it’s structurally deficient, throw it away, and build the structure you want to guide it - but the typing is essentially free, so that’s tractable. Don’t view it as bad code, view it as a useful null result.
But if you’re not using Claude Code or Codex or Roo or relatives, you’re living in an entirely different world to the people who have gone messianic about these things.
Yes, I was using "ChatGPT" colloquially. I’ve tried Claude Code, Copilot - I currently have Gemini running though madox2's vim-ai plug - and a few of the others, but I’ve never personally seen the kind of 10x productivity gains some people here talk about. In my experience, it’s typically been quicker to just write the code myself than to wrangle with the model’s output, iterate, and debug. That’s not to say the tools are useless - like I said I think they're great at exposing docs that are disparate or obtuse (looking at you Google) but for actual problem-solving and building, they’ve unfortunately rarely felt like a net win.
I'm sure you're correct that a lot of this comes down to workflow and domain - in mine, the overhead of prompting, reviewing, and correcting usually outweighs the benefits. Of course, as always, this is just one asshole's opinion!
That's not actually the only issue, unfortunately. Steam did in fact accept Bitcoin for a while, but it was dropped in 2017, with Newell stating:
> “We had problems when we started accepting cryptocurrencies as a payment option. 50% of those transactions were fraudulent, which is a mind-boggling number. These were customers we didn’t want to have.” [1]
That's quite interesting, I wonder how they were fraudulent as bitcoin transactions dont have chargebacks etc. In the article they also mention that the price for the game would fluctuate which seems to indicate they actually priced the games in Bitcoin. Normally price would be Euro, USD etc and price conversion to Bitcoin would be done at check out. I guess these were the early days though =)
Seems like a catch-22. Crypto can’t be used like legitimate currency because it’s not used like legitimate currency, and fraud can’t be addressed because there’s no regulation and no mechanisms by which to make victims whole.
There are parts of me that can see some appeal in cryptocurrency but I can’t see any way around this, at least not without impacting what made it appealing in the first place.
I think this is the biggest problem with crypto that it will never be able to solve. Every year there are millions of dollars lost in crypto due to scams (the "send me crypto and I'll give you money" kind). The instant you have a digital good people can actually buy with crypto and sell for real money, it becomes a money laundering machine.
Like you could get money from ransomware, buy a ton of games on steam, then sell the account to a third party.
This will probably be "solved" by legally exempting stablecoins from nemo dat. Basically stablecoins will be declared clean by law so recipients don't care.
While volatility indeed can be a problem (depending on how the whole thing is setup), I fail to come up with scenario of 50% fraudulent transactions... Does anyone have links to more details on what kind of fraud they meant?
Accepting bitcoin payments with 0 confirmations? It shows a complete lack of understanding of Bitcoin and cryptocurrency in general, especially in 2017 when PoW was the main driver and PoS chains weren't really mainstream.
It’s not a big deal in case of Steam – they can just pull the games from your library if the payment doesn’t go through. A bit trickier with in-game purchases (but in that case they could wait for the confirmations).
Fraudlent is accoriding to the law. If I steal your bitcoin I spend them on Steam it is fraudlent. I know cryptobros think stealing bitcoins are OK and shouldnt count as fraud but law isnt written by cryptobros.
It’s not this. Steam accepted 0confirmations to ease the payment flow. Before the transaction would be mined into a block, the fraudster would submit a new higher priority transaction sending the payment to themselves.
Having very recently gone through this process for both a “local” number A2P registration as well as a toll-free registration process I can say, unequivocally, that’s already what it is.
There is no step in the process that would deter any company from taking the ~30 minutes of effort to get the registration details in order. We run a legitimate company that was only seeking to send transactional notifications that our customers specifically requested, and it took 4 rounds of back and forth to get approved. However, each step provided a very clear error code with very specific remedies (e.g. Opt-in form must include language which states…), which would make it a rote process for automation or even manual repetition. In fact, the only thing that I could see which would deter a company which seeks to rely on spam for profit would be if the registration fees were larger than their expected profit (they’re not, thankfully).
I don’t even mean this comment to necessarily be an indictment of the process - it was…fine? I’m just not entirely sure what it’s purpose could be except to collect additional fees for each SMS campaign.
That's like asking why a weather app needs both a date and city - the temperature on July 4th matters, but it's completely different in New York vs. Cairo. Same with this - the year sets the global context, but the location defines the local experience.
