HackerTrans
TopNewTrendsCommentsPastAskShowJobs

splix

no profile record

comments

splix
·เดือนที่แล้ว·discuss
Exactly. The commit message is supposed to be for the future developer, not to generate changelog.

And the main case when that developer reads the commit message is when he doesn't understand _why_ that commit exists. Not what it changes, but what is the purpose of certain lines. So he runs "blame", sees commits, the original developers are not with the company anymore, the old JIRA may not exist too, and the only hint is the commit message.

https://dev.to/splix/the-why-behind-the-code-2bb1
splix
·5 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
That may sound strange, but it turns out I don't use WASM as well. Last time I touched this part was ~8 month ago, and WASM was just one of the experiments, and I forgot about this. Just remember it was hard to find a right approach initially, on how to execute JS without NodeJS environment. But with a right set of polyfills it works now.

Anyway, I see we have a bit different approaches on how to handle JS part, and I could get some ideas from that.
splix
·5 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
Nice project, thank you for working on it. I was trying to figure out the architecture, and I understand that it runs a Deno VM to execute JS on the backend?

I was working on something similar, but for JVM backends [1]. And it seems there are a lot to learn from your project. For example, I'm using GraalVM that executes JS on the server. But I have to compile JS to WebAssembly because otherwise it produces a lot integration issues on the backend. Do you do the same?

[1] https://github.com/emeraldpay/double-view
splix
·5 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
I'm curious why you can't legally pay in crypto? I heard a few times about companies paying in crypto to their remote workers. In fact I heard that a US company was paying in BTC withing the US, though I'm not sure I trust this particular story. I also see that Deel accepts USDC, and to my understanding they convert to local currency of the remote worker. Is that all illegal? Truly want to understand.
splix
·5 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
I had a bad Cloudflare experience. So, my card on file got no balance one day (my bad, I forgot to update to a new card), and they just turned off the services.

They somehow managed to charge partial amount (like 80% of the bill), but decided to turn off everything anyway, even the services that could be covered by those 80%. They turned off what they offer for free, and we were unable to change the setting, like instead of their CDN point traffic to an S3 bucket, etc.

When they do that they basically freeze your account. I mean you cannot provide a new card to pay the outstanding bill, or do anything at all actually. You're not welcomed here anymore. Locked out. That's is a terrible way to react to a payment failure after being a paying customer for a few years.

It was hard to reach the support, and it took multiple days until I found someone on Reddit who looked at our ticket and it eventually helped.

PS I had much worse experience with GCP after being a loyal customer of them for like 15 years, so Clouflare is good.
splix
·7 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
I think the author means all dbs that fit a single server. Because in distributed dbs you often want to spread the load evenly over multiple servers.
splix
·8 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
We made a script to avoid such situations. It checks the dependencies, just by parsing the package.json (or the lock file), checking the relevant time on npm registry, and returns error if it finds a too fresh package added.

We run it on CI for each commit/PR, and if a developer tries to commit a change that updates a JS dependency to a too recent it prevents the build from running, and so on. Basically we expect that a Supply Chain attacks on NPM would be noticed in a couple of week, and we enforce this time window to our code.

See https://github.com/emeraldpay/paranoid.js
splix
·8 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
Ah, I had a similar situation with them. They also closed my personal account immediately after closing the business account. I was really surprised it works that way.
splix
·9 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
I mean the arrest. But as I just learned [1] he is being allowed to make periodic travels to Dubai since recently. So things got better for him now, but that's just since July 2025. Before that he was physically staying in France since August 2024, which I would call as "living" as it's the place where he spent most of his time.

[1] https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20250619-france-soften...
splix
·9 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
I think for the past couple of years he lives in France. By force, so it's not very straight to recognize it as a free or not.
splix
·10 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
AFAIK the recommended way is to open a bank account through smaller banks (aka neobanks). They just send you a card to address specified and once you activated it you (first) get a bank account for payments and (second) can use it to prove address for others. Also, if you legally rent then you get the council tax documents, though it takes roughly a month for them to send. This is another proof of address. And the bills of course, but again it takes a month or so to receive the first letter.

So it's unclear how a digital ID solves anything in regarding the proof of address.
splix
·10 เดือนที่ผ่านมา·discuss
I'm wondering how did you ask for the links?

It supposed to search for actual documents and then process them (extract content, summarize, giving you the links, and so on).
splix
·5 ปีที่แล้ว·discuss
Please note there are different meaning of the "law". And for blockchain it's "law of nature", i.e., just how it works, the principles you have to accept, not legal laws.

So at least for the Ethereum Classic thing, the code was written in the way that just allowed such action and therefore you should not reverse the transaction. Note that the hack was still illegal, that's the fact, so you can (and should) go to the law enforcement to do something with it. But there was no bug in the code of the blockchain itself, it was working exactly as it was supposed to. There was a bug in the smart contract though, but it's not a part of the blockchain, so it's not a violation of principles/nature of blockchain ("code is law") but a 3rd party mistake.

Same here, no principles of the blockchain was broken. So the "code is law" stands. But the transaction is still illicit, and is a hack.