gassi

Ran out of VC money now that only AI companies get funding.

You wouldn't hold that opinion it you did maintain a popular open-source repo or interact with AI "PR review" tools at a serious level. Even the most SOTA models are willing to accept/merge absolutely trash PRs so long at the summitter can convince it that is addressed it's review comments.

I've taken the position that anything the ultra-wealthy say is likely wrong, and every decision they take will negatively affect society, unless and until its corroborated by an unbiased source with expertise in the subject matter.

Fred Rogers, Terry Crews, Lin Manuel Miranda, Henry Cavill, John Cena, Steve Irwin and Dave Grohl to name a few.

And contribute your changes back upstream, right?

The prompt itself is copyrightable but not the art/code generated from it.

Sparkling DevEx

Wherever you want to be.

  Tailwind works for your team? Go for it.
  Inline CSS for your solo project? By all means.
  Still stuck on SASS? It'll keep working just fine.
  All in on modern CSS? More power to ya!

In a world where we can type anything into a text box and get the information back instantly we are circumventing the need to visit websites altogether.

This is purely anecdotal, but the only people in my extended circle making this transition (to any extent) are the technically savvy; everyone else is slowly realizing how awful AI tools and "AI-first experiences" can be and are actively trying to avoid them.

Currently Senior Director of Engineering & Applied AI at Luxury Presence

Shovel salesman selling shovels, nothing to see here.

My favorite conspiracy theory is that these projects/blog posts are secretly backed by big-AI tech companies, to offset their staggering losses by convincing executives to shovel pools of money into AI tools.

In the last 6 months we've seen no fewer then a dozen vibe coded/AI assisted open source, self hosted projects launch that complete against ours. So far all but one has fizzled out, with the same pattern each time: announcement, repo with 1 giant commit, 2-4 months of feature releases, loss of interest from the author, and finally abandonment.

I expect once users get burnt enough time, they'll stop adopting the new cool thing until it's been out long enough with consistent releases.

A coding agent allows one to feel the raw productive power a great programmer can tap into. It allows one to feel like the “10× programmers” they’ve sat next to in the open office for ten years, whose skills they never quite achieved themselves.

I fear this is the trap that most "new" developers will fall into over the next few years. I'm also worried the "great programmer" will cease to exist as the current greats retire, and the potential greats will never reach that level due to their reliance on LLMs.

Parlour, of Seacroft, Leeds, who called for an attack on a hotel housing refugees and asylum seekers on Facebook, became the first person to be jailed for stirring up racial hatred during the disorder.

Kay was convicted after he used social media to call for hotels housing asylum seekers to be set alight.

"Marlboro CEO: Banning under-16s from smoking won't fix lung cancer"

Not that I agree with the approach (digital IDs, age verification, etc), but of course a social media CEO doesn't want to see it's user base restricted.

I wouldn't use one without the other, which is how they won my business.

Ah wasn't aware of that, thanks.

No plans according to some recent reddit threads, but you can probably email their support for a more up-to-date info.

They don't, but you shouldn't feel too bad as fastmail is australian, ie not american, which (at least personally) is where we're trying to divest.

This is a slap on the wrist for a company of Epic's size. Anyone know if this comes with restrictions on future in-app purchases made by children, or if these already exist in NL and Epic was ignoring them?

Addy Osmani is a Software Engineer at Google working on Google Cloud and Gemini

Ah, there it is.

[deleted]

"The purpose of games is (usually) to win. If it works, it works. Doesn't matter how you won. There is no cheating when there is winning."

Related, GrapheneOS has a handy feature to disable network access for individual apps.

this webpage is hosted on a drawer-bound fairphone 2, running postmarketos

https://far.computer/how-to/

I commented some version of the stated theory when the original article was posted, and having read this post, I don't agree with the idea that "the same basic pattern applies to basically anyone who is trying to make money by doing anything", at least not the examples given.

Pizza restaurants want to sell pizzas and are incentivized to produce quality, affordable pizza so people come back regularly. Customers want pizza (every now and then) and will visit pizzerias that offer tasty pizza, made with quality ingredients, in a pleasant setting, at a reasonable price. Ergo, incentives are aligned.

Dating app users (generally) want to find a partner and leave the app, ideally never to come back. Dating apps make money when users fail to find partners and pay for features that "increase their chances". Now, incentives are unaligned.

otherwise it means "no one owns it" - which is fine if that is what you want.

Thanks for pointing this out, I removed that line to clarify.

I run a semi-popular open source project (https://romm.app/), and this is a topic we tend to revisit regularly. While there will always have to be someone at the top who owns the project, we've tried to organize ourselves in a way that should prevent a complete hostile takeover:

  * Gihub organization is co-owned (2 Owners)
  * I own the domain, they run the Discord server
  * Finances are handled by https://opencollective.com/
  * All code is GPL or AGPL licensed

AI tools make different types of mistakes than humans, and that's a problem. We've spent eons creating systems to mitigate and correct human mistakes, which we don't have for the more subtle types of mistakes AI tends to make.

Why does it matter?

Because AI gets things wrong, often, in ways that can be very difficult to catch. By their very nature LLMs write text that sounds plausible enough to bypass manual review (see https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2025/07/14/death-by-a-thousand-s...), so some find it best to avoid using it at all when writing documentation.