gg2222

Unrelated to the topic, but wow, they're still using moment? I thought it was kind of deprecated and been trying to use other libs.

This blog post and others are from 'security saas' that also try to make money off how bad NPM package security safety is.

Why can't npm maintainers just implement something similar?

Maybe at least have a default setting (or an option) that packages newer than X days are never automatically installed unless forced? That would at least give time for people to review and notice if the package has been compromised.

Also, there really needs to be a standard library or at least a central community approved library of safe packages for all standard stuff.

Wow, this reminds me of how Windows XP was such a beautiful UI.

UI these days are flat everything and pretty boring.

SolidStart

For people wanting to try something else, I recommend SolidJS and SolidStart. Personally I never tried Next.js exactly because it feels like too many decisions are being made for me without having any choice. And I don't trust frameworks like that.

Depending on the project, just write an SPA with an API server, or if it is a static website just prerender it and serve on Cloudflare. I don't get the appeal of all the complexity. If you need SSR for SEO, then SolidStart is a nice and simple solution.

Yes, so actually SolidJS is newer.

Exactly. SolidJS api itself is very small, there is not much you actually have to learn. This makes it simple to reason about and at the same time gives you the confidence to wield it, which makes it actually feel more powerful.

Yes I know SolidJS 2.0 is coming. I said "it doesn't need so many major revisions", key word being "so many".

(Telling myself: damn should of put that in my original comment cause of course someone's gonna comment that.)

To the author: Yes, do consider SolidJS seriously. I find that its reactivity system is simple and the easiest to reason about, with none of the messiness and constant changes to "the best practice way to do things" like React has gone through the years.

SolidJS seems designed right so that it doesn't need so many major revisions and it feels quite stable.

It feels like an evolved React that is simpler to use.

Also its signals and stores can be used in normal .ts files, so it is easier to create re-usable "stores".

edit: BTW haven't been following Svelte but it's already version 5? I thought it was the newest framework.

Agreed. If it is mass hysteria why doesn't the government just say so instead of saying "they don't know".

Some people just can't accept not "knowing it all".

Their FAQ talks about using games as the first step in fighting companies discontinuing services of various kinds (not only cultural products).

It is true there is a cultural aspect for games and they mention it, but if a regulation like this passes, then it is easy to imagine what other regulations would be pushed next.

Yes it could be great for consumers, but too many regulations means it becomes harder to start and do businesses and the advantages fall to the established players and in the end there are less options in the market(s) due to monopolies so the consumer is actually worse off.

If games are a kind of software, why must games face this kind of regulation when other kinds of (actually more important) software doesn't / won't?

In saying this, I'm not in favor of this regulation, actually the opposite - because imagine if this regulation passed for games and then passed for software in general next.

MMORPGs are software provided as a service, but this proposed regulation wants to make them playable even after the service provider discontinues service. If applied to software in general then that means all SaaS once it has any customers, then it has the obligation to make (and keep?) that software usable indefinitely.

And what if the reason you had to discontinue was out of your control? Eg. one of your critical service providers went out of business? Guess you'll have to recreate that service provider's whole service so your now open source software can still work on top of it before you can actually go out of business yourself.

It is just an absurd expectation for game companies to have to consider this. And in the end it just makes it harder for the smaller not-established game companies while giving the bigger companies another boost, concentrating their advantage.

> the idea of preserving games for future access aligns with broader movements toward digital preservation, similar to efforts in other digital media industries like film and music

And from the FAQ:

> If this practice is not stopped, it may be codified into law and spread to other products of more importance over time, such as agricultural equipment, educational products, medical devices, etc.

So there is a notion of using games as a step to 'stop' companies from being able to discontinue services.

If this passes for games, next would be software in general.

Next thing you know if you develop and sell any software you will have to make sure it is usable forever. Any MacOS updates or Windows updates (or iOS/Android updates) breaking a software or app you once sold to a few people and discontinued? You will have to fix it until you die or face penalties.

Do you have software with a cloud component sold under a lifetime license? Be prepared to maintain that service forever or release its complete source code if you don't. Additionally, you would need lifetime licenses for any critical proprietary third-party components your cloud service relies on or be prepared to cover their service fees indefinitely.

While this perspective may seem exaggerated, there is always a double-edged nature to such regulations. The sword slices both ways.

I think all games/software would then convert to a service/subscription based model, cause there would be no limit to future liabilities when selling any lifetime license.

Pay monthly to play the game. Pay monthly to use any software (including downloadable software and apps.) Pay monthly to use the OS.

EDIT: Actually thinking about it, it seems this proposal wants to cover mmorpgs which already are subscription based.

In that case if the same rules applies to software in general, then any software that is subscription based would also have to be usable indefinitely even if you sold just 1 month subscription and went out of business.

This kind of creates a bad incentive where users of software / players of games might want the company to die so they can use the software or play the game for free forever.

How stable is Bun these days? Does it crash often? Is it ready for production app server use yet?