The issue is that I did not discover the problem until it was already too late. Then I asked myself is DNS level filtering even useful for me? A traditional browser based adblocker already does the job. Pihole does not block ads YouTube.
The quality of life improvement of having pihole was minimum. I would rather just use cloudflare or google's DNS. What value prop pihole provides I have no idea. I think that is what I feel about many if not all privacy focused tooling this way.
Privacy tooling often is devoid of common human nature which is get shit done without making a religion out of it. Good tools are not configurable or dynamic, they just serve a purpose. A hammer or a toaster over...these are good tools. The issue with privacy tools is more about the movement and mission aspect of it.
I underestimated how prolific the idea of tracker - first engineering. Tracking (by the defintion of privacy advocate) is inherent in many if not most system. The privacy preaching that I have been subject to made me believe that privacy is a one button tool.
Whether open source or privacy, I feel like has very little net utility when you offset it by convenience or consequences. You can pay for YouTube premium or you can update the sideloaded app every other week.
I did some interviewing rounds with PaaS platforms for advisory roles. I loved Heroku and was ruined by Heroku so I thought maybe the industry has something new to offer.
The model is largely "built to be locked in" model. It is not something innovative. The issue is that to what scale of operation the platform considers there customer to be locked in where they can hand them a bill that compensates for the ease of entry model for all the hobby/free tier.
With Vercel I feel like these level is becoming lower and lower. You can within minutes launch a full startup with Vercel and AI assisted coding. And Vercel assumes that as long as you do not recieve any traffic that is good. The moment you recieve even a mild amount of traffic you are considered locked in.
To some people that is a fair trade because they have so little trust in their products in the first place investing hours instead minutes is a fair trade. If the traffic comes they are already in the green. If the traffic does not come any effort they have put in puts them in red. So, you put as little effort as possible to get thing out there.
I like Vercel. They have figured a monetization model for Slop SaaS. The other PaaS needs to catch up. In 2026, PaaS exists as a model to make revenue out of slop.
If you can afford it hire a virtual assistant and have them filter things for you and curate stuff. If you are suffering through things to find glimpses of enjoyment it is best you outsource your suffering to someone dedicated. Seriously, I had a $5 dollar an hour assistant who did all sorts random stuff for me. This even included curating things to read, talking to professional acquaintances on behalf of me using a script. It will cost you around 200-300 dollar a month but with the right person you can skip the BS.
In my advisory job founders always raise the question about open sourcing within the first hour of meeting me. They think that open sourcing product means transparency and developer trust which helps with early adoption. Every single founder I talked to brings up open source as a market penetration method to drive the initial adoption.
I always say to just stop with the virtue signaling led sales technique.
I despise the "we are like the market leader of our niche but open source" angle. Developer as a buyer and as a community these days in my opinion do not care about open source anymore. There is no long term value to that. The moment a product gets traction the open source elements is a constant mild headache as open source product means that they have no intellectual copyright on the core aspect of the product and it is hard to raise money or sell the company. And whenever a product gets traction they will take any excuse to make it close source again. With an open source product they are just coasting on brand. Regardless of what your personal opinion is, this has been largely true for most for-profit business.
Open source is largely is nothing more then a branding concept for a company who is backed by investors.
I do not think that is the issue. The recent acquisitions from all these big tech companies did not have any "meaningful" user base to begin with.
I think your name alone carries significant weight in the industry and you have built a very large community.
If you even vibe code something with, you will get a stupid amount of money thrown at you and a contract that bounds your existing projects and the next 3-5 years to a particular company as project lead.
Well, Cloudflare does not launch anything. They acquire to build products. Look into all their recent product launches. They acquired a relatively small company and converted the founding team to a product team.
So, if you want them to build stuff, ask yourself, are there any "Docker Registry" startups out there. If jsdelivr/globalping is not keeping you busy enough... there is an idea
I am not sure that is possible because I act as a buffer between him and my parents.
My other siblings drew a line, and they are miserable themselves because they can't help.
He is the kind of guy who will take a mortgage on my parents' house to do some sort of forex play because he has figured out the true intention of US oil policies and how that impacts South East Asian oil-supplying countries—and wants to bet everything on Brunei and Malaysian currency.
No, I am not. That is the thing—it has been 7 years, and we are stuck in the same loop.
If I were to give your friend advice, it is to send a lot of warm emails. Joining a freelance marketplace is going to be brutal. Connect with folks in different communities, talk with them a bit, and then ask if they have any jobs. The success rate I would say is about 1 out of 50 to 70 outreaches.
He has a physical disability, and he had major trauma that he is dealing with, but that was more than a decade ago. He went to therapy a few times but a couple of therapist essentially gave up on him. He said they were zoned out when he keeps talking.
I have been at my "limit" for several years already. I have a day job, and at night I am making freaking "Happy Easter" posters in Canva for a print shop with 200 followers on Instagram. Everyday I am begging the guy to take over the contract while he continuously keeps saying "you do it" or that his brain does not work. He is literally doing the whole 9 yards. Even has a podcast and live streams. I am not kidding at all. I told myself maybe talking to the camera is a way for him to connect with his friends and a coping mechanism.
We all carry our burdens. It sounds extremely disrespectful and dishonorable, but without the help of autistic parenting groups, I wouldn’t have lasted this long. He is my platonic autistic surrogate son.
My hobby involves trying to help my brother get a job. He has a disability and can only work remotely at low-skill jobs. So, I have spent years applying, starting, and doing work in virtual assistant, support desk, and social media management roles for him. I apply to contract and freelance projects on his behalf, get started with the work, and later try to hand it off to him. He will either say one of two things: "You do it yourself" or that his brain cannot process the work. I make 10-15 times more money at my regular job, so hearing him say "You do it yourself" is not fun.
This hobby also includes trying to convince him that the business schemes he comes up with are not great—they're exclusively fraud-related, such as various forms of gambling and crypto stuff.
Mum keeps telling me that if I do not look after him, he will likely end up in a worst situation. He is in his early 40s by the way.
I did a second job as a hobby so I could just pay him the money, but that did not work because he keeps investing it in one of his schemes. So, I have to find him a job and convince him to keep it. I have a set of fake accounts that I use to apply to jobs and beg him take them on while he continuously says "you do it".
I do not understand what bubble even means, and I do not think the developer influencers do either.
Was NFT or Crypto a bubble? The idea of a bubble means that it "pops" in a dramatic fashion. NFT prices in aggregate faded slowly, and the impact it has only applies to a handful of individuals. Moreover, the behavior we have seen with crypto and nft can largely be speculated that the purpose was largely illicit financial engineering.
If a handful of bad PRs "are destroying open source," Open Source as a concept is surprisingly in a vulnerable project. No project worth its salt ever integrates unverifiable PRs. No valid OSS ever integrates uninvited PRs in the first place. Every PR is driven by an issue or a very robust that is specific description. Any project that receives an "unsolicited" PR does not make the project maintainer yell "Oh, I am ruined."
I have stopped checking out these programming content videos for the last year or so. But I stupidly did it here. Every single channel has become like Coffeezilla with an agenda, being AI as a catalyst of great harm.
It would be impossible to buy a company as a steward. We worked with them. In the early 2020s, their teams were as lazy as IBM boomers. Happy to hop on a call, but let's do an rain check or whatever and come back to you after 17 weeks to say no in an email CCed with 42 people playing hot potato between commercial people who try their best to sound technical. You need a mind map to know which person you were talking to and who introduced you to them.
My money is on holding companies like IAC buying the brand first through financial engineering and restructuring finances initially. They would load it up with debt like they did with the sporting goods store in Sopranos.
Afterward, they would sell it to a Euro-based caretaking company like Bending Spoons, with a focus on maintenance engineering rather than innovation engineering.
- Buy a product that has name recognition overshadowed by a monopolistic company and the leadership is trying to make a pivot and failing terribly.
- Leadership is aggressively rebranding to appease a takeover. They keep doing the most basic forbes council op-ed title moves to make the product appealing.
- It is not a parts-shop, the team is used to sense of "eh what you are going to do about it". It is a signboard and patents that you can use to hostage bigger companies.
- The takeover company has figured out maintenance engineering. You buy the product, you cull the team because they are not a growth engine. You focus on maintenance, and you milk the brand. Any eastern European or LATAM team can approve an automated version bump PR and send out "let's jump on a call" email.
Heck, even Tai fricking Lopez bought Radio Shack under similar pretense.
I do advisory for pre-Series A startups as a last ditch effort to save them.
I do not get the unified industry delusion about "why X company has a bad product". It is usually either one of two things: comfort or ego. Everyone knows that but do not want to say it out loud.
I have seen these happen time and time again. Companies that are cash cow, do not care to do a better job. There is no incentive to do a better job. Moreover, the recurring thing is that if I did something different, I wouldn't have been this much successful in the first place.
The rest of the smart consultants walk on eggshells. They hint at stuff but never want to bite the hand that feeds them because the clients would rather fire you than be challenged.
It is not an IBM thing; it's generic business thing to some degree. I really have to call this a delusion. Good consultants submit generic reports that just tell them what they want to hear. It is not you; it is the economy. Stupid consultants that are well-meaning tell them they should be the best on competitor intel. Do you not think some stupid person did not approach IBM to do what Oracle or AWS is doing? Of course, they did, and they were fired immediately.
The best consultants are less of a consultant and more of a therapist.
After doing only four-month projects for the entire year, this year's realization was that nobody in the industry wants to do better. Everyone is in their place because of ego or a perceived sense of success. Or because of a grand conspiracy theory. IBM has a significant number of government contracts, so they are set for life because the vast majority government IT systems are pigeonholed into IBM systems. The acquisition is to tell the shareholders that we are so successful that we can literally buy companies. We do not even care to do things. Whatever the new thing is, we will buy it at some point.