>If I'm REALLY turned on, how long does it take for me to go from "I wanna use this" to "I am using this"?
I'm glad this is a concern. I maintain software to the effect of buttplug.io and a particular inspiration to start the project was how difficult alternatives were to get going with. I don't want to install anything, or register anywhere, I just want to get my rocks off!
And thank you for buttplug.io. It's super easy to integrate!
I'm laughing so hard because the guidelines in that section track very closely with things that I'm constantly reminding people about with unmanned aviation software. You just need to s/turned on/in an emergency/.
I used to work in self-driving cars waaaay back when (2008-2011, the early days of the current era) and I did pick up some of these ideas from there. :)
Wow, that's awesome! Super curious what project it is you run. (If you don't want to link it to your HN account, feel free to poke me directly, my contact info is in my HN account bio :) )
Sure; I have a Walltaker[0] (hi Gray) client with Buttplug support[1], it buzzes when your wallpaper updates! But my magnum opus was software akin to Edgeware[2] - basically, based on a Yaml config, it'll show you local or remote porn in various ways. That would have Buttplug support had Github not nuked the repo and ignored my reinstatement request for 4 months. I chucked it on Codeberg[3] if you're curious.
I believe librewolf updates very quickly, to be fair, it's really stock firefox with just some privacy/performance tweaks that are probably automatically enabled and then run through CI and then released.
No, the updates are not slow. I've been running Librewolf for years now, no major complaints. FYI I'm on a rolling release (linux) distribution, but I doubt that changes much. If you are comparing it to stock Firefox, there is no competition (Librewolf is imho just more enjoyable experience); if you are comparing it to Chromium (and other Chromium-based browsers), in my experience the biggest 'problem' is the lack of support for pwa's. Anyways, give it a try.
That seems a bit rude. You get the QA you paid for - zero.
And nevertheless, whenever Windows software doesn't work in Wine, you shouldn't think "Wow, how did you fuck that up?". They never promised it'd work in WSL.
It's a company, not volunteers. They're obviously have some long-term strategy to extract money beyond support (it's an editor). They are doing a lot ok marketing right now (dev-rel).
It's very much okay to have high expectation, even if the product costs zero. The user is the product, and so on.
Code that panics on bad external input (such as the OS) is incredibly sloppy. They already have the Result — they can just bubble it up and present an actual error message (and maybe even ask for diagnostics, etc).
WSL is a pretty niche version of "Linux". I would guess that close to 0% of what makes it to the front page of HN had a QA team that explicitly tested it on WSL.
It's pretty self-evident that Linux support can't be expected to mean Windows support. If something is broken in the Windows simulation of a Linux GUI stack you should be complaining to Microsoft, not to the developers of a program that works fine in a normal environment.
Not really! In modern Linux specifically it's just a regular user group, but it's the de-facto standard name of the "administrator" group - users who can escalate to root privileges.
You might not even have wheel anymore; Debian just calls it "sudo" now.
Not sure about tall-poppy syndrome, but I think it's somewhat justified (this could be argued though) that success most often doesn't look like what we think it should look like.
In most people's minds success should come from a combination of talent and hard work. We think people who work hard and come up with good ideas should become successful.
But usually working 'within the system' limits your ability to be succesful. If you save the day at your current job, you might get a 20% raise if you're lucky. If you are mediocre but change jobs often, you will probably beat that.
In software, getting a high paying job usually hinges on your ability to get someone willing to pay you a lot of money.
I'm sure there are people who are getting paid 10x more or less for doing work that is fundamentally the same, just with different presentation.
For example I know a guy who's a mediocre PHP dev, but managed to snag a couple of high paying clients, and got into OE over covid, and brings in a ton of money, despite the fact that somehow he still doesn't seem to be working that hard.
Does he deserve that money? Is he someone we should look up to? I don't wanna say no, but I also don't wanna say yes.
> We think people who work hard and come up with good ideas should become successful.
I think that's some sort of platonic ideal that hasn't really been all that true for a long time, though. What brings success is coming up with valuable[0] ideas, and then executing well on them. There are many ideas that are good that are unfortunately not so valuable. And there are many people who work hard but just aren't all that talented or effective or productive, and their work ends up not amounting to much.
> Does [someone who doesn't work that hard but has high income] deserve that money? Is he someone we should look up to? I don't wanna say no, but I also don't wanna say yes.
Maybe we should step back and consider that this is the wrong question. "Looking up to" someone is an emotional thing; IMO we should only look up to people for intangible "virtuous" reasons, not because e.g. they've managed to make a bunch of money. Look up to people because they are honest, have integrity, are kind, and help people.
"This guy makes a lot of money despite not working very hard" should be viewed dispassionately. Evaluate the work itself, and the representation and selling of that work. If it's done with integrity, the product of the work is as promised, and no one is harmed, then it may be worth emulating.
I personally think that the social conditioning we've all gotten that suggests that hard work is good and virtuous is garbage, and is an attitude and message that has acted as a tool of oppressors. I hesitate to repeat the "work smarter, not harder" buzz-phrase, but I think there's a lot of truth there.
[0] I don't even necessarily mean "valuable" in the monetary sense, though that too-often is a big driver.
