Brampton is a suburb of Toronto with a large Indian immigrant population. This is leading to tensions within Brampton as different Indian political factions attempt to influence Indian politics from Canada[1][2][3].
uv rules and poetry drools; I like the idea of poetry but once you see how fast uv can build your environment whether or not the files are in cache I think you could never go back to poetry.
I haven't used uv but it looks like its trying to be a drop-in replacement for pip which would therefore lack everything that makes poetry great.
Rye on the other hand seems to be extremely poetry-like while being written in rust for speed: https://rye.astral.sh/
But personally, I can't justify switching my employer to experimental python dependency management over something as inconsequential as taking a minute to install dependencies so I'm sticking to poetry until Rye has some years of development behind it.
Same here... not gonna switch tools every 6 months for such a small benefit. I like that it downloads its own interpreters though, makes it easy to start a project.
uv feels a lot like pip but unlike pip it has a correct resolution algorithm. I understand that people are working on a higher-level product that incorporates uv.
It's not necessarily that one is better than another; it can be complementary. I tend to think that Nix makes many of the reasons to use a container superfluous, but there still remain other reasons to use containers.
I have a Docker with an old version of centos which for some reason is the one provided to us.
I then create an "overlay" over it using nix, so I can actually use software with newer glibc etc... easily.
Regardless of that, nix is way better than docker, in the sense that docker doesn't ensure reproducibility, you can build a Dockerfile in two different days, and get different versions of packages installed, this is simply not possible with nix, you have complete control over your tools.
And if you decide to port your application to a "nix package", you have complete control over all the dependencies of you application, a reproducible way to build it, and an easy way to deploy it.
On non-Linux it should be faster/less overhead; on all platforms I suppose it's just arguably easier/quicker to make changes & 'rebuild', and then the result is that that just is your environment, it's not a container inside it that you have to exec into or run commands through or make your IDE use or whatever.
But mostly it's just two different approaches and people will be happy to argue about why there's is better, or that they don't use either (just the system environment (on a non-NixOS system..) as it were).
I don't hate time zones because I have to deal with them in software - there's libraries for that. I hate time zones because I have to deal with people, who never talk in GMT and rarely specify whose time zone they're referring to when scheduling something and don't know if they're currently in DST or not.
Please refrain from writing comments like these. From the HN guidelines
Please don't complain about tangential annoyances—e.g. article or website formats, name collisions, or back-button breakage. They're too common to be interesting.
Actually Github has become recently more difficult to browse with the text-only browser I use. They keep messing with the HTML and breaking this simple structure.
I just download the .zip files and browse offline.
and it doesnt show the project language(s), the first thing i do when checking a repo on github is to check the languages used, and usually this help me decided whether or not i want to follow this project or not
ocaml, f#, clojure, zig, raku, array language --> insta follow
I'm not sure the US approach to free speech works that well in practice. Political polarization has become worse in the US than in most other developed countries, and that looks like a consequence of free speech. When you value free speech far above social harmony, you give a lot of power to extremists of all kinds.
How do you reconcile this against the fact that extreme anti-establishment parties are surging throughout Europe, including in places like Germany that have some of the most extreme restrictions on speech? For instance Germany is now even considering trying to ban the AfD [1] (political party) who are now polling at > 20%, which is quite high in a functional multi-party system - higher than Olaf Scholz’s Social Democrats party. Incidentally 47% of the country supports banning them, 47% oppose it. There have also been numerous instances of violence against party members, and more. And there are similar divides in many other European countries.
The one thing I'm certain of is that we're all living through a major inflection point in history, for better or for worse.
European countries have a history of assimilating anti-establishment parties into the establishment. They did it with revolutionary communists, they did it with the green movement, and now they are doing it with the conservative nationalist / right-wing populist / whatever parties. The Finnish equivalent of the AfD is in a coalition government led by the traditional center-right party. In Sweden, the corresponding party supports the right-wing coalition. And in Italy, Brothers of Italy is the leading party in a coalition that turned out to be unexpectedly moderate.
I think here you're talking more about what eventually will happen, while your earlier comment (and the one I was responding to), is more about what is happening. The fact that the polarization may end up playing out better than in the US (though the situation in Germany as of yet gives no indications of that) is a different issue than the fact that there is an undeniably sharp rise in polarization, even in places with stringent speech controls.
In my experience, polarization has been in decline in Europe for a few years. It started rising in the aftermath of the financial crisis and the refugee crisis, but the farce around Brexit and the Russian invasion of Ukraine tempered it. People are again willing to work within the system rather than trying to replace it with something radically different.
Germany is a bit of a special case due to their history. They still can't cope with anything that looks even remotely similar to fascism.
But it's not really "Germany" calling the AfD fascist, in fact ever more Germans are voting for them. Rather the people who don't like them are calling them fascist. You're effectively describing an effect of extreme polarization, where 'the other side' is demonized in ways with, at best, tenuous connections to reality.
I think your post hits on the primary cause of polarization: incompatible ideologies. One group in [some country] want ever more immigrants, regardless of the cost or quality. The other side wants to limit immigration to skilled and educated migrants who are expected to learn the local language and integrate into society. These two sides' views are different enough that it's pretty tough to get a meet in the middle, and the issue is relatively urgent, so you get polarization.
Of course this leads to nasty online conversations where you might have one group talking about the crime rates of new migrants, while the other side calls them racist or fascists for doing such. And I would agree that this probably contributes to polarization, but it's also an effect of an already existing polarization, rather than anything even close to a core cause. Europe's had no difficulty polarizing plenty throughout history, long before the internet. It's just for the past ~80 years we've all been living in a little bubble of relative peace, tranquility, and growth. And I think that bubble has popped.
On what basis are the US limits to speech better than the European ones? The US is arguably a more violent society now - is that the better part? The GDP per capita being higher? The trade-off between the two?
On the fact that you're investigated because you hold certain beliefs or say something that the party currently holding power doesn't like.
I don't think it is a more violent society. Maybe in the discourse, but not in actual crime. And yes, people are more polarized, but I think it is tied more to the economic context than anything else.
I would say having access to guns in the US makes killing someone much easier than in the EU where most countries banned guns, making murders much harder to commit with a knife or a blunt object.
But this aside, did the murder rates increase in the last 10-20 years, decreased or is it the same?
Switzerland has a lot of guns but a homicide rate below 1 per 100k, it is not necessarily the guns as such.
US rate is a little bit up from early 2010s, but a lot lower than in the 1980s, in the EU the rate was low in the early 2020s compared to the previous ten years.
The European free speech legal infrastructure dates from the ECHR in 1950, and was somewhat imposed by the Allies after the war. As well as a lot of people who wanted to avoid having populist incitement to genocide again.
The limits on free speech in European countries are also much older in parts. The history in Europe on that topic is just very different from the US, I'd say.
Indeed. People forget that e.g. Portugal, Greece, and Spain were dictatorships until the 70s, and that a lot of eastern EU was under Communism until 1990s.
"The EU" is not equivalent to "France and Germany", despite what they think.
The speech culture of France and Germany is very different to the US as well, it's not just the dictatorships of the recent past.
Nazism as an ideology is illegal to promote in Germany. Use of Nazi symbols outside of an artistic or educational context is illegal in Germany and France (most European countries really). Several neo-nazi, neo-fascist, and communist parties have been banned since the founding of the modern German state. Far-right parties in Germany are always walking a fine line - if their membership flirts too much with nazism or fascism they are very much liable to be banned.
Several European countries with strong democratic traditions in the modern era remain very wary of extreme ideologies. Their proponents murdered millions and burned the continent to the ground less than a century ago. Most people are comfortable with the state killing these movements in their infancy.
Less active than Mastodon, I'd assume more active than Nostr.
But the interesting thing for me isn't activity — it's the people on there.
Of the cohort who had >100k followers on Twitter, I think more of them post regularly on Bluesky than post on Mastodon. Bluesky definitely has a more cohesive feel, especially because there's currently just one instance & mod team.
I'm a donating supporter of the Mathstodon.xyz instance, but (sadly?) most of "math Twitter", at least the education-focused university faculty, ended up on BlueSky. I think there's a strong appeal for "a straight forward Twitter clone without Musk" for a lot of people.
Mastodon, and the Fediverse in general, make user interaction decisions on purpose to limit many of the issues common to social media. Think about: mob culture, addiction, and the like.
I wonder if BlueSky intends to follow on those. For example, hiding user actions counts (repeats, favourites, etc...) until the user acts on one.
Things like these may be strange for those accustumed to Twitter, but personally, is what makes me stick with smaller instances on the Fediverse.
My bet is regardless of any initial good intentions, since BlueSky is a company, market pressures will inevitably force them into dark patterns like we see on every other commercial social network (going back to the early days of the companies, Facebook, Twitter, and even Google looked really good early on until all were corrupted by profit motive). My belief is that the profit motive is necessarily at odds with free communication.
To me, the ActivityPub network (Mastodon and friends) is relatively unique in the social media space in having no direct commercial pressures (the protocol is developed by W3C) and therefore being inoculated against the causes for these dark patterns.
I don't know about nostr, but I find it is a lot less active than Mastodon. In general the tech accounts I am interested in have moved to Mastodon rather than bluesky. I imagine this would depend on whose activity you are interested in, and where they have chosen to migrate to
Bluesky is much smaller than Mastodon, but how active it feels will depend on who you're following. It also has an Algorithm (TM); I never really missed this when I went from Twitter to Mastodon as I mostly used the linear timeline anyway, but I gather that some people find that Mastodon feels empty/inactive without one.
They’re all just arbitrary ghettos that aren’t dissimilar to each other. None of them matter in terms of influence but are like nice Reddit boards for certain interests.
