You can make a fully open source router using free range routing (FRR) on Linux together with a switch chip mounted to a pcie card. There are also a lot of recent development around exactly this, with Vector Packet Processing, DPDK and SR-IOV to allow wire rate processing even at 100g+.
However, that Mikrotik is being mentioned as under US control stands out like a sore thumb. Given that its a Latvian company, working entirely inside the EU, having no US offices. What is much more plasable is that an attack is deploying zero-days in the routers and switches to crash or otherwise take over the equipment. That the US would be able to hide magic satellite receivers, for decades without researchers finding anything, inside of a non-US manufacturer's equipment that can get a clean signal inside of a datacenter to remotely shut them off, is so far fetched I don't even know what to say.
Feeling very much the same. Attempting to use it through Claude Code as a model it just completely lost all context on what it was doing after a few months and kept short circuiting even with the most helpful prompts I could give, outside of just writing out the answer myself. I really do not get the praise for this model.
Being "better than Opus 4.6" is not really something a benchmark will tell you. It's much more a consensus of users liking the flavor of an answer, rather than fueling x% correct on a benchmark.
I hear this comment warnings, and can easily see this myself being true. But, how could one actually make a reasonably safe http server in C from scratch?
That would honestly sound like an amazing book, just walking through all the ways it's horrible chapter by chapter, and how to structure the code instead, slowly. Like an accelerated history to create such a matured http library.
In short, a hostile takeover forced by Shopify through Ruby Central.
It was sparked after Ruby Central chose to platform an extremist figure prominently for their last RailsConf against the wishes of the sponsors, losing them a lot of sponsorship money, as well as community support.
What baffles me is how they have $41k in expenses monthly for so few users. I'd love to see a breakdown of what in their infrastructure is eating up so much money.
Another very interesting point here is, nobody seems to have read the actual post, and gone on about cheap shots against "women" as if were some general object you can collect together.
Like the post explores fictosexualism, the escapism of an AI girlfriend/boyfriend, the general agreed upon sense that its a coping strategy, taking a strange turn into true crime and AI characters, summarizing with that this "AI gf/bf craze" is going to continue to be a minority of people, but that instead this will develop (author's claim) into a sort of erotica, similar to romance novels, and that "romance scams" on places like Instagram may become common.
Like there are like 7 or 8 different subjects one could have a great discussion about from this post alone. Yet we talk about how you can meet a man in VR, how men are bad (?), and that women are in hetro relationships when men are not. It's a strange deviation from the rather intellectual nature of Hacker News.
I think the key point here is actually from the first paragraph.
> HashiCorp’s CEO predicted there would be “no more open source companies in Silicon Valley” unless the community rethinks how it protects innovation.
Open source is literally a license to give the power to the people, the community, such that we allow anyone to contribute and give back. It is not a tool to "protect (your) innovation". It is a very self oriented move built on the greed inherent in capitalism. Basically the opposite of open source and tangentially copyleft.
I think a lot of people forget, especially the newer generations, that open source is not some "good boy points" or graceful gesture you do to others. It's not about you doing a "kind gesture" to the community, open source is a political move to use copyright law against itself to give the ownership right to anyone. Many seem to look past that, and try to seek out a middle ground between "my innovation" and getting the usage/praise from having the code be labelled as open-source. You can even see the Hashicorp CEO misuse the open-source label pretty regularly.
Doing some math on the example courses (300 points for a 45 min course) and the requirement of gaining 50 000 points, that's a whopping 333 hours of just courses.
I think we can see to Hacktoberfest as a comparison to this "let external junior devs to deal with backlog" idea. And this project gives the same fear and worries of that "chase for the cheapest PR to get my reward"-logic as that which Hacktoberfest encourages.
While GitStart pays their developers, that alone could encourage better habits, I fear it could also enable this chasing reward mentality harder, setting the juniors up for failure, as well as frustrating the customer with having to deny and review multiple low-quailty PRs.
How is this avoided? This seems heavily at risk to cause more headache than help.
As a blog post with the title "Don't be clever" ending up with the author's answer being an even clever-er solution, than talking about the hidden fight against complexity in software, was an odd ending note.
Uh. "cropping up like ants" is definitely a take. Not a good one, as most the browsers here had their first release date of 199*. I will list them out.
Mullvad, is the Tor Browser with the Mullvad VPN included, and released 2023. However, the Tor Browser, which it effectively is, is from 2002.
Brave, the one in this article, is from 2019.
Opera is from 1994.
Vivaldi is from 2015, and is developed by Opera's previous dev-team after a bad sale to a Chinese company.
Microsoft's first browser, Internet Explorer, is from 1995.
I can not comment about Zoho's browser, as i know little about it.
When will VC companies stop conflating source available with open source? It's even worse than just being closed source as it's trying to pander to a group for money, and without any respect to the actual values of what they are saying.
However, that Mikrotik is being mentioned as under US control stands out like a sore thumb. Given that its a Latvian company, working entirely inside the EU, having no US offices. What is much more plasable is that an attack is deploying zero-days in the routers and switches to crash or otherwise take over the equipment. That the US would be able to hide magic satellite receivers, for decades without researchers finding anything, inside of a non-US manufacturer's equipment that can get a clean signal inside of a datacenter to remotely shut them off, is so far fetched I don't even know what to say.