Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | kortilla's commentslogin

> I'm not sure why people are replying to my comment with solutioning and trivial suggestions

Because your comment didn’t say you solved it and you asked for notes without any polish as if that would help.


I didn't say I settled on a solution for all time. I said "for now". I'm still interested in alternatives.

That’s not “just stop eating avocado toast” advice. It’s advice to cut extremely high expenses.

Avocado toast advice is dumb because it’s an expense that doesn’t move the needle.


Cutting medical insurance, for example, is a good way to end up medically bankrupt and lose anything you’ve ever saved if anything goes wrong. And by the time someone hits 40, chances are something has gone wrong.

> The US government directly buying stakes in Intel is A-OK, but any involvement from the CCP in any form in any company is Not Good ?

Yes, it’s the US government. Of course it thinks advancing US gov controlled technology is good and CCP influence in the US is bad. That’s a completely rational stance and it’s not even hypocritical until the CCP bans some US product and the US gov complains.


> it’s not even hypocritical until the CCP bans some US product and the US gov complains.

It's not even hypocritical then. Both sides are protecting their own interests. These interests are partly at odds to each other. They're going to do what they believe is necessary, even if it "seems" hypocritical. That's not a bad thing, that's just ... how things work. China isn't innocent of this either. It's so weird how people are always painting this as "US bad".


Then look at it from countries that want to protect their sovereignty and culture. The smart move is playing the big guys against eachother not joining either side.

> That's not a bad thing

Except US was all about Capitalism and they have now turned back and embraced Socialism except its socialism for losses and should be paid by the tax payer.


Libertarian strawmen notwithstanding, there has never been a time when America didn't in some way regulate industry, particularly with regard to matters relevant to national strategic interests. If you're surprised by America doing this, it's because you got lost in a fantasy and forgot to check in with reality.

It's so weird how people are always painting this as "China bad"

Now imagine your not American. Now you have the choice between 2 nations you don't trust. Which one are you going to take? The one you don't trust that hasn't done you anything personally, or the one that recently went rogue and is making a point of it to make everyone's life a little more miserable, actively?

Yes, different groups with different interests and priorities will make different decisions. This is common sense, not some sort of "gotcha". If your country has more to fear from America than China, then obviously pick Chinese suppliers.

What was their revenue and what was profit as a percentage of that?

If the profit percentage hasn’t increased, “record profits” is meaningless drivel that just means it kept up with inflation.


Yeah, pretty terrible outcome from prohibition designed to curtail alcohol consumption. It’s pretty the worst example to go for if you’re trying to convince people that state stores are good.

11-13 isn’t anywhere near 60.

Anyone who has shopped a state run vs regular liquor store knows how much worse the gov version is unless your goal is higher prices, worse service, and worse selection.


You didn’t read your own link. The peak value of minimum wage was $12.12/hr in 1968 after adjusting for inflation.

https://www.epi.org/blog/the-value-of-the-federal-minimum-wa...

You cannot with a straight face claim bringing it to $60 has anything to do with inflation when the value it would need is right in that article.


I misspoke by not including more detail. $66/hr to match homebuying purchasing power of Boomers in the 70s. You can get away with less per hour as a living wage assuming reasonable rent, and in NYC, that is likely $30/hr (which we will get to as older voters continue to age out, and younger voters age into the electorate, and are engaged to push wages higher [exit polls show ~75% of New Yorkers 18-29 voted for Mamdani]).

https://www.epi.org/blog/a-30-by-2030-minimum-wage-in-new-yo...

> With the FBC cost data we can estimate a living wage that would allow workers to support their families. Table 1 shows that the living wage in 2025 is already above $30 an hour in Manhattan ($33.89), Queens ($31.31), and Staten Island ($30.68). While Brooklyn and The Bronx do not exceed this threshold, the costs facing these families will almost certainly continue to rise between today and 2030. These figures make it clear that discussions of a $30 minimum wage in New York City are not superfluous—they reflect the very real needs of working people throughout the city.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/guy-shared-just-high-min...

> Someone Calculated What The Minimum Wage Should Be Today Compared To The '70s In Order To Afford A Home

> Now, Chris's video isn't to suggest that minimum wage, at any point in its history, allowed people to buy homes outright. Rather, he told BuzzFeed, he wanted to highlight the ways in which "wages have decoupled from cost of living, housing prices, and broader economic growth over the last few decades."

> "The original purpose of the minimum wage was to ensure that even low-wage workers could participate meaningfully in the economy. Not just survive, but live with dignity," he said.


That's more of an issue with housing prices drastically outpacing inflation because of dense housing construction being illegal in most of the country.

Yes, don’t be obtuse. “Vendor lock-in” is not some foreign unheard of concept.

Teams of the smartest people on earth make these kind of big vendor decisions, vendor lock-in is top of mind, I tell anyone who will listen to avoid databricks live tables and their sleezy sales reps pushing it over cheaper less locked in solutions

But then what? At the end it’s still on you to approve and you have no idea what is hiding in the code.


You don't approve it. You just slowly grind the submitter down with minor feedback. At some point they lose interest and after a year you can close the PR, or ask the submitter to open a new PR.


I hope you don’t actually do this to people.


It works best if you don't reply immediately. I recommend successively increasing the response delay. Keep it short enough to make sure that they don't start bugging you on other channels, but long enough to make sure they have time to cool down and question if the continued effort is really worth it.

As long as the response delay increases at least geometrically, there is a finite bound to the amount of work required to deal with a pull request that you will never merge.


Tragically, when you are organisationally impaired from saying 'no', this is the only way (besides, you know, quitting and getting a new job).

It's absolutely soul crushing when you're motivated to do a good job, but have a few colleagues around you that have differing priorities, and aren't empowered to do the right thing, even when management agrees with you.


I am both an open source maintainer and contributor. This is absolutely despicable behavior. You are purposefully wasting the time of a contributor for no other reason than your own fear of saying “no.”

If you’re not going to merge something, just ficking say so.


Wasting the time of someone who put no effort whatsoever into their work and wants you to put in a lot of effort? Fine by me.

If you've read the thread, the strategy you're replying to is about a workplace scenario where outright rejection is, for whatever reason, forbidden; not an open source situation where "no" is readily available.


It makes even less sense in a work context either. This behavior will permanently alienate this user & potential customer. I’ve seen this exact scenario play out many times before.

Why would it be acceptable for the sumbitter to behave this way and not the reviewer? We do have AI "assisted" submitters behaving exactly like this and acting irate when forced to actually reflect on the turd they're trying to shove into my inbox


If people do this to him? How else to react?

The context here is lots of vibe coded garbage thrown at the reviewer.


It takes less time and effort to close with an explanation why. It is going out of your way to waste the time of a contributor.


Context here is a corporate scenario where just closing is not possible.


Think about any time a computer is used in something designed to last 30+ years.

Cars, airplanes, construction equipment, etc.


I am pretty sure that those machines are not running Debian.


And almost certainly not whatever the next stable release of Debian is.


Why not? How do you know that? Debian is used pretty widely


they might run Debian but not upstream Debian/stable

you mainly find that with systems needing certification

this are the kind of situations where having a C language spec isn't enough but you instead need a compiler version specific spec of the compiler

similar they tend to run the same checkout of the OS with project specific security updates back-ported to it, instead of doing generic system updates (because every single updates needs to be re-certified)

but that is such a huge effort that companies don't want to run a full OS at all. Just the kernel and the most minimal choice of packages you really need and not one more binary then that.

and they might have picked Debian as a initial source for their packages, kernel etc. but it isn't really Debian anymore


You'd be surprised.


Even if they are, they are not updating to latest Debian stable.


They try if they are internet connected


I mean they can't in the first place, because ports only have unstable available


You would be wrong. People want new software


If we are talking about embedded control systems no, you don't want new software, you want your machine to do what is supposed to do. At my workplace we have some old VME crates running VxWorks, and nobody is gonna update those to the latest Linux distro.


This is incorrect. Internet connections and 3rd party integrations have changed this view of “the software doesn’t need to change once it leaves the factory”.

John Deere, Caterpillar, etc are leaning heavily into the “connected industrial equipment” world. GE engines on airplanes have updatable software and relay telemetry back to GE from flights.

The embedded world changed. You just might have missed it if your view is what shipped out before 2010.


My experience is in big scientific experiments like particle accelerators, I guess other fields are different. Still, my experience is that:

1) The control network is air gapped, any kind of direct Internet connection is very much forbidden.

2) Embedded real-time stuff usually runs on VxWorks or RTEMS, not Linux. If it is Linux, it is an specialized distro like NI Linux.

3) Anything designed in the last 15 years uses ARM. Older systems use PowerPC. Nobody has used Alpha, HPPA, SH4 or m68k in ages. So if you really want to run Debian on it, just go ahead and use Armbian.


Yes, you are out of touch with what has happened with embedded. Companies love internet connected things, especially big industrial things.

It’s absolutely terrible for security but remote visibility into how your 100 ton haul truck is operating via some cloud API is what people like and keep buying.

No air gap, just hooked up to a cell phone network with maybe a VPN if you’re lucky. Either way, the kernel is handling packets directly from the Internet and keeping the kernel up to date is critical.


I don't think those systems can/should be updated using apt though.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: