zsoltkacsandi

Completely agree with this.

The biggest lie of software engineering is that everything can be testable with tests. That a 100% test coverage is an indicator of quality software.

This seems like a blog post with a link to a github repo. So I am not sure what product you are referring to.

I’ve never seen any reliable service built on a NoSQL store as a primary data store. If data consistency and not losing customer data important for you, RDBMS are just fine.

This is a great project, but material design was the worst thing that Google invented and implemented. Completely tasteless, visually unappealing. Would be nice to see such a project with anything else than material design.

And this is how Chinese AI companies will win over the U.S.

Play stupid games win stupid prizes.

There was no system prompt, I asked claude thru the CLI to implement something. It did not agree that I need that feature and offered something else. I started debating with it, why did I need it, and it started derailing the conversation, and explaining why I was wrong. And this is not the first and only case.

With LLMs there is no social tax, I can be as blunt as I like. But there are other taxes to pay with LLMs; they don't learn, they BS relentlessly, there is less fun and camaraderie.

My experience is the opposite. They bullshit a lot, derail the conversation/coding session, get defensive, and gaslight. It is not “social tax”, but they mirror sometimes the worst human behaviour.

I'm paying for models I'll never be able to access

That is very well put.

With JWTs you don'T have a list of valid tokens as state, but only a list of invalid ones (revoked).

Yes, and a lookup operation is a lookup operation.

Your database or data structure used for storing the sessions/JWT revocation entries won't really care whether you look for things that are active or things that are inactive/revoked. If you store it in the right database, both lookups will be O(1), so it is the same (or at least the difference is negligible), regardless of the size.

JWTs have a limited expiry timestamp, so you only ever need to maintain a revocation list for tokens not expired yet.

Sessions have expiration timestamps too, and you can configure them however you like.

I had exactly the same experience, and we went into the same direction (ansible + ec2). No regrets.

Correct me if I am wrong, but AI made software development and operations more expensive than before. Yes, it is faster too, but the question: is it worth the price? Can the users consume new features in that pace?

A full stack Golang framework (I know).

From a technical standpoint, these are always impressive projects, but I've always wondered: has anyone ever encountered a use case where the Caddy was the bottleneck?

We shipped software to governments and some big companies where this is a big no-no. Try to explain to your clients that during the development process some pieces were sent to Antrophic, and they might keep it for whatever reasons.

JWT is fine. The problem is that people are using it for the wrong problems, like session cookies. But that has nothing to do with JWT.

It’s ironic that even Linux is better Windows than Windows.

Nothing. That’s why SaaS providers like GitHub start to build up features like GitHub CI to lock people in. You can easily move the repo, but moving your full CI has a real cost that businesses will take into account when they are considering to move anything.

What do you think, what is the business for GitHub in providing limitless private and public repo hosting?

I think decentralization is the wrong answer for what people really need: portability.

That’s very well put.

After some medical leave, writing the third post for my series about how Linux works: https://serversfor.dev/linux-inside-out/

The suggestion to setup some kind of IAM policy to shut things down and stop resource usage is insanely complicated for users who need this kind of feature the most.

We set this up at my last job like in 10 minutes. Complexity is a matter of perspective, and if your job to do this, you have done this many-many times, and you have ready to use infrastructure as code templates.

Yes, AWS is massive, the documentation is huge and makes things inherently complex, but flexible too. You can define what behavior do you want when you exceed your limits. We can argue whether this is obfuscation or complexity or what, but based on my experience AWS optimizes it's product for enterprise-ish companies, that can afford to have SREs who knows exactly what to do in such cases. That is where they have their own training/certification program. For simple use cases there is AWS Lightsail where pricing is simple and easy to understand.

But even if it would be insanely complicated, that is a reason to downvote? HN used to be better than this kind of "I don't like your comment, let's downvote it".

Interesting to see that some people assumed there are no kill-switch mechanism, and when it turns out they just did not know about it, the (totally valid and factful) comment gets downvoted because it is against their initial assumption. Not what I would have expected on a professional forum.

Yes, and exactly that is why I started my first comment with this: "I agree with you at some degree".

I agree with him/her, just shared my more nuanced take, based on my experience coming from my past workplaces.

You can set up cost-based alerts (actual or forecasted) that send notifications via email or SNS. Based on this you can set up automations, such as applying an IAM policy to prevent further resource creation, shut down resources, etc.

It was the sign of a product packed with traps, footguns and all kind of things that would go wrong and the blame goes to the user.

I spent 5 years optimizing spendings on AWS at various companies. Yes, it does come with traps and footguns. On the other hand if you know what are you doing, there are plenty of tools to optimize your spendings with RIs, saving plans, auto-scaling, etc, and spend less than the list prices.

Based on my experience AWS for the companies that can afford to pay surprise bills out of pocket if something goes wrong.

Price simulators are fine.

Yes, as long as you do not have seasonal traffic, auto-scaling, spot instances, burstable instances, saving plans, reserved instances, floor/custom pricing, etc. These are tools to optimize your spendings and spend less if you know what you are doing.

defending deliberately obfuscated pricing

A bit contradictory that price simulators are fine, but then the pricing is deliberately obfuscated. Then which one?

They don't know in advance how much bandwidth will you use, how much traffic will you have, what auto-scaling rule will it trigger, etc. It's not obfuscation, it's billing based on your usage. And as with everything in life, there are tradeoffs.

I agree with you at some degree, but I would like to point out that AWS pricing is much more complicated that you can calculate how much will you pay from a static number showing up on the UI.

If it bothers you that you need to open two tabs for cross-checking the costs, you may want to avoid every cloud provider, not just AWS.

Once you have NAT gateways, CloudFront, S3, auto scaling, loadbalancers, etc, calculating the cost becomes an art rather than an exact science. And if you don't use these, there is no point of using AWS, there are plenty of "cheap" VPS providers.

The reason this blog post does not come with any concrete examples how to use this enablement for useful and constructive things tells you something very important - it is a toy and they do not know who and how they will use it.

Every time I come across AI projects and AI integrations (including my previous job where I full-time worked on one), no one was able to show me concrete examples how can I use it for constructive things.