keeganj

Yeah I really enjoyed Cachy but the model of using the AUR to install third party applications just seems broken. I don't want to have to trust some random install script maintainer in addition to the 3p app developer. And sadly I don't have the time and attention to spare to review the AUR scripts of apps every time I update.

I switched to Kubuntu to keep KDE (which I really found I enjoyed from Cachy) while using a more stable and familiar ubuntu base. It's not one of the "gaming" distros but I haven't noticed any major drawbacks with the games I play.

I agree, it took me a second to parse. It may be because this is the first time I've seen "frontier models" described as "Frontier AI". That sounds more like a company name, especially when the F is capitalized.

Sounds great! I just started working through their tutorial this weekend too and hope to be able to make something like this soon.

This is brilliant.

This is absolutely a painpoint for me and other individuals that prefer to hold as much of their assets as possible in the market. The amount held over in checking for day to day transactions feels like little more than "cash drag" once you have enough saved that you can weather a market downturn. Right now I do expense tracking and budgeting largely so I can figure out how much balance I should keep in my checking account, then transfer the rest to investing. Combining the accounts like you propose would save me substantial time and missed market returns.

A problem you may run into in targeting bogleheads is that they like to see that you're well established before committing their life savings. Putting a substantial amount of money in a non-FDIC insured financial institution without a track record could be a non-starter. Advertising on your landing page that you base your services on top of Fidelity might lower that perception of risk.

For infrequent events, why not both? A webhook to push the event and a full list at /events?

I first ran into it when our database was holding negative values that we wanted to show as positive on the front end. To flip the sign we would multiply the stored value by -1. Since 0 was a valid value in our DB, the displayed value after multiplication was -0, which looked like a glitch in the UI.

This is almost exactly what I was imagining. Just subscribed to updates, very interested to see what this becomes!

Interesting take, I'm not deep in the python ecosystem, but this looks like it's lightweight enough to function as a refreshable notebook. Will give this a try, thanks!

I didn't know you could write SQL directly in Rmarkdown like this, very interesting. Thanks!

I'm not a data scientist, but I've been interested in the idea of a "code notebook" ever since Jupyter hit it big. I write mostly in JS/TS for application logic, so this looks like it could be really useful.

Related, does anyone have any recommendations of a (Postgres) SQL "notebook"? I don't really need any visualizations, more just a markdown integrated doc that allows me to lay out the different queries I use to answer a question.

Anyone think that users will eventually become desensitized to the "malicious software" popup? If the process is this complex and buggy I imagine a lot of developers simply won't bother with notarization. Eventually if enough legitimate apps don't bother the popup will become common, and users may be annoyed more by Apple than any particular app. Like how the "run as admin" prompt just became an extra automatic click to many users in Windows.

It's not like the big development shops that do take the time to get the notarization process working get a special green checkmark by their app. After the app has been launched the first time, it's back to an even playing field with the apps that didn't notarize.

Will give this a try! With all the UML discussions lately it's made me nostalgic for having an ER diagram of my schema. This even looks simple / dependency free enough to run in a CI tool to keep such a diagram up to date with the codebase.

> Traditional enterprises were the dominant software employers in the 1990’s, meaning that tech trends likely reflected their interests. That would be a good explanation for UML’s initial rise. Over the past two decades, though, software culture shifted progressively towards large tech-first companies and startups. Neither, historically, was the target audience of CASE vendors. Over time traditional enterprise starts borrowing from tech and startups vs the other way around, leading to the progressive decline of CASE in its extant niches.

This I think was the real thrust of the argument. While UML's death may be exaggerated in many corners of the corporate world, so too is its life in representing our industry as a whole.