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

I'd be fine with that, although I can only edit the title.

Another option would be https://html-props.dev/

EDIT: For clarity, if it does get updated, the original URL was:

https://old.reddit.com/r/javascript/comments/1pj4ros/props_f...


> Carriage returns in bash scripts are cursed

Also the full story here seemed to be

1. Person installs git on Windows with autocrlf enabled, automatically converting all LF to CRLF (very cursed in itself in my opinion).

2. Does their thing with git on the Windows' side (clone, checkout, whatever).

3. Then runs the checked out (and now broken due to autocrlf) code on Linux instead of Windows via WSL.

The biggest footgun here is autocrlf but I don't see how this is whole situation is the problem of any Linux tooling.


This is imo ultimately a problem with git.

If git didn't have this setting, then after checking out a bash file with LFs in it, there are many Windows editors that would not be able to edit that file properly. That's a limitation of those editors & nobody should be using those pieces of software to edit bash files. This is a problem that is entirely out of scope for a VCS & not something Git should ever have tried to solve.

In fact, having git solve this disincentives Windows editors from solving it correctly.


> I don't see how this is whole situation is the problem of any Linux tooling

Well, bash could also handle crlf nicely. There's no gain from interpreting cr as a non-space character.

(The same is valid for every language out there and all the spacey things, like zero-width space, non-breaking space, and vertical tabs.)


You will have the same problem if you build a Linux container image using scripts that were checked out on the windows host machine. What's even more devious is that some editors (at least VS Code) will automatically save .sh files with LF line endings on Windows, so the problem doesn't appear for the original author, only someone who clones the repo later. I spent probably half a day troubleshooting this a while back. IMO it's not the fault of any one tool, it's just a thing that most people will never think about until it bites them.

TL;DR - if your repo will contain bash scripts, use .gitattributes to make sure they have LF line endings.


The biggest mistake was running Linux programs over files created by Windows programs. Anything you move between those worlds is suspect.


It wouldn't be a problem if git didn't try to magic away the difference.


I desperately want to like Bruno, since I think it might not do the same rugpull as Postman and Insomnia.

But the UX is just terrible (for me) or at least has been every time I've tried to start using it more.

I mean, come on, the most basic use of creating a request goes like this:

1. Sorry, can't let you create a request before you create a collection.

2. Sorry, can't let you create a collection before you make a decision on in which path you will be storing all your collections.

3. Sorry, can't let you create a request before you think of a good name for it.

etc.

Like what the heck? This should be just one click to create a new untitled request then fill in the URL and send.

At first I thought this might be growing pains since it was new but every year I try it and it hasn't improved.


Not an expert on how this will affect the results but since the list is so long, would it be better to show visitors two random-ish features at a time and have them pick the one they care more about? Or at least offer that kind of UI as an option or the default, and the current list for those who want more control.


I know this isn't quite what you mean, but when you first hit the page, the list is in a random order, but it's then stable across reloads.

I considered the 'vs' approach, but I worried that there might be a lot of iterations where one or two of the options would be things that the person didn't understand, or didn't care about.

How do you feel about something like this: The user goes through the long list, picking what they understand and don't dislike, then the 'vs' system is there for helping determine the order of those items. Then the user gets the ranking which they can tweak.


> I worried that there might be a lot of iterations where one or two of the options would be things that the person didn't understand, or didn't care about.

I won't disagree here, it would be tedious.

> picking what they understand and don't dislike, then the 'vs' system is there for helping determine the order of those items

Sounds promising to me.


If I want to replace openWakeWord in Home Assistant Voice Assistant pipeline with this, any idea how difficult it would be?


That's a great question, and it's a core design goal for Nanowakeword.

The short answer is: it should be very easy.

Since Nanowakeword is designed to be a full framework, the plan is for it to have an inference API that is largely compatible with how openWakeWord works. My understanding of the HA pipeline is that it's a Python-based system.

In theory, the steps would be: 1. `pip uninstall openwakeword` and `pip install nanowakeword`. 2. In the relevant Home Assistant Python script, change the import from `from openwakeword import ...` to something like `from nanowakeword import Model`. 3. Instantiate the model with the path to your custom `.onnx` file.

The Nanowakeword `Model` class is designed to handle the necessary audio preprocessing (feature extraction) internally, so you shouldn't need to worry about manually replicating it. The `.onnx` models are already compatible.

While I haven't tested the Home Assistant integration myself yet, building a seamless replacement path is a top priority. Your question is a great confirmation that this is what users want. If you run into any issues trying this, please open an issue on the GitHub repo, and I'll be happy to help you debug it.

Thanks!


`git reparent origin/main -n 3` sounds a lot like `git rebase --onto origin/main HEAD~3` and `git move-branch from to` sounds like `git branch -f from to`.

I love backup branches as much as anyone but I'd also recommend getting used to `git reflog` or perhaps `git log --all --oneline --graph --reflog` if you're worried about losing commits.

There is one* footgun in git that you can't just reflog your way out of and it's stashes because they piggyback off of the reflog, so dropping stashes will also remove them from the reflog. In those cases you can still visualize them with `git fsck --connectivity-only | grep 'dangling commit' | awk '{print $3}' | xargs git log --oneline --graph --all --reflog`.

*(as long as you've committed your changes, if not then there are way more)


Yes! My pet peeve is people keep saying "no one would pay" or "it wouldn't work" but the thing is, as far as I know, it has never been tried.

For example Thunderbird is fully funded by donations.[1]

Of course Thunderbird's budget is in a different magnitude than Firefox but I'd guess the amount of users is also in a different magnitude.

[1] https://blog.thunderbird.net/2023/05/thunderbird-is-thriving...


> as far as I know, it has never been tried

Opera, up until 2000, was trialware that nagged users to pay. At that time, they were one of the first browsers to support tabs. In 2000 they put ads for non-paying users, and from 2005 they removed ads and survived entirely on Google money. Then in 2013 they became yet another Chrome-based browser.

Obviously, that was quite some time ago at this point. Perhaps paid web browsers' time has come again?


Opera corporation had most of income from embedded devices. Presto engine (and something they had before) could run on low end CPU without MMU and floating point math, with a few megabytes of memory! Browser wss just a side gig for them.


Weren't they also (at least in part) acquired by Chinese investors at some point in the not too distant past?


Yes, Opera has done a Theseus and is nothing like it was.


First of all, your donations to Mozilla don't go to funding the browser.

Even if they did, it isn't even enough to sustain the company to continue developing the browser.


> First of all, your donations to Mozilla don't go to funding the browser.

This is exactly my point. They should establish direct Firefox donations. I agree that it won't change anything overnight, but they need to start somewhere.


It would be death for Firefox given the scope of its mission


Unofficial but it is fun to watch live as the tracker numbers go up https://stopkillinggamestracker.pages.dev/


Another, much more flashier tracker: https://stop-killing-games.keep-track.xyz/


Making it a competition between EU nations is in HN title speech ”unreasonably effective”.

(I mean, Denmark, come on, show your northern neighbors that our assumptions about you are wrong! Etc.)


Thunderbird is fully funded by donations[1]

Of course Thunderbird's budget is in a different magnitude than Firefox but I'd guess the amount of users is also in a different magnitude.

As far as I know there has never been an attempt to fund Firefox by donations. You can _only_ donate to Mozilla, which does not go to Firefox development.

People keep saying it wouldn't work but it has also never been attempted so we do not know for sure.

[1] https://blog.thunderbird.net/2023/05/thunderbird-is-thriving...


My masochist anti-tracking set up:

- uBlock Origin with "Disable JavaScript" checked in the settings. Only enable for specific sites.

- Temporary Containers with "Automatic Mode" checked in the settings. Also MMB and Ctrl + LMB always open links in new temporary container. This provides full session isolation for all tabs. There are permanent named containers for logged-in services like email that are only used for email. Outbound links from email for example open in a new temporary container.

All browsing by default happens in a clean isolated session with JS disabled unless explicitly allowed.

I also have Behind The Overlay Revival for when I'm too lazy to zap elements with uBO.


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

Search: