Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | 010101010101's comments login

Why?

For some people there is only the serious life for the serious man. Everyone else are just manchildren.

And they are right. Give these drugs to these people, they will turn into manchildren because it's their reality, and it's true for them.


“With high throughput and low latency” are the operative requirements for OP and GQL doesn’t help with either on its own.


I think there are valid complaints about the number of git commands / flags and the quality of the docs not helping users understand them, but in my experience _most_ developers who complain about git both have never used any other VCS (including other DVCS systems) and have no mental model for what git does at all. The latter is usually the bigger problem, because it’s just not that complicated, but it prevents devs from either working things out on their own or asking a reasonable question. I agree with the parent post here - there’s nothing confusing about the error message presented as an example of “why git is bad” here.


No ones using this to actually get useful information. The key thing is people watching and hoping something wacky happens, are you unaware of just how popular “IRL” streaming is with gen-z/alpha?


This article presents a weird description of “estranged” that seems to be hinting at a more of an active choice by a child to ignore a parent, which to me screams “over political differences.” I can’t tell if it’s attempting to include parents that have abandoned children or not. fwiw, I’m about to turn 40 and haven’t spoken to my father in over 25 years after a falling out… when I was 12. Either of us could easily contacted the other, but neither have ever tried (I don’t honestly know how I’d respond if he tried) - should I be counted in this data?


I rarely find interfacing with an external chat interface useful, but integration with the coding environment (e.g. Copilot) is an immediate productivity boost.


I don’t think that’s what’s implied here at all - the focus on blamelessness is to get to the root cause of failure and prevent future occurrences rather than to punish existing failures without affecting any actual change.


They did evolve it with Inbox, and then subsequently killed Inbox to roll worse functionality into Gmail proper.


I don’t see anyone walking away feeling ego bruised from this, I mostly see people annoyed that the _more_ correct option of “I can’t know because you didn’t provide enough information” isn’t represented and the author is attempting a “clever” gotcha moment instead.


You’d need the same information for rooks to handle castling.


Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

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

Search: