davidjfelix

to be fair, this discussion has been had numerous times here and the industry has arrived on "open-weight" to describe the practice of releasing the post-training weights in an open manner but not releasing the data it was trained on.

That's what they call this and I think it's a pretty clear definition these days to people in the industry.

What are the .rn files in your examples? They look like rust but perhaps I'm missing something?

Visibly claude produced website. No link to code.

Is the expectation that people write kotlin in their browser? How do people work this into their development workflow? Is this just a neat demo?

yes - the lake freezes.

I should also clarify. The sailboats in particular need the bridges raised which is why they have a scheduled time to exit. Ordinary boats can be removed closer to the water or navigate the river without the bridge being raised. Those boats are also removed for the winter.

so you're saying its not the evil that's the problem its the hypocrisy?

It mostly seems like this was a response to the complex world of SEO. My perception is that SEO was seen as this pay-to-play 3rd party service that was offered by "experts" which allowed you to get the leg up on your competition. Search engines saw this as value being externally captured so they offered ads. Want to buy your way to the top? Quit paying 3rd parties to play the game and pay directly.

It may result in an outsized penalty to bootstrapped companies but being VC funded doesn't make you immune to this. VC funded companies with revenue will not be able to offset their revenue by reinvesting in R&D (software development) expenses, so in some cases they may be seen as having a profit when they previously wouldn't have. In those cases they'd have a tax burden.

Or Cap'n'Proto, Protobuf, Cloudflare workers, Cloudflare Durable Objects. The LAN house is cool too.

Is that the case? It's just a product you like?

Yeah -- I see nobody but you mentioning HTAP and I see every comment on your account talking about the same product. That's astroturfing.

So what's the goal here? Astroturf SingleStore ads in any post about databases?

Unwrap is fine if used sparingly and as mentioned, to indicate a bug, but in practice it requires discipline and some wisdom to use properly - and by that I mean not just "oh this function should be a `Result` but I'll add that later (never).

I think relying on discipline alone in a team is usually a recipe for disaster or at the very least resentment while the most disciplined must continually educate and correct the least disciplined or perhaps least skilled. We have a clippy `deny` rule preventing panics, excepts, and unwraps, even though it's something we know to sometimes be acceptable. We don't warn because warnings are ignored. We don't allow because that makes it too easy to use. We don't use `forbid`, a `deny` that can't be overridden, because there are still places it could be helpful. What this means is that the least disciplined are pushed to correct a mistake by using `Result` and create meaningful error handling. In cases where that does not work, extra effort can be used to add an inline clippy allow instruction. We strongly question all inline clippy overrides to try to avoid our discipline collapsing into accepting always using `unwrap` & `allow` at review time to ensure nothing slips by mistakenly. I will concede that reviews themselves are potentially a dangerous "discipline trap" as well, but it's the secondary line of defense for this specific mistake.