I remember seeing at one job, to share a “token” that was in a byte array, they iterated the byte array and concatenated the values. It was supposed to be an internal “auth tool”/“sso” but was unusable in the php app I was trying to use it with because it couldn’t (or at least I wasn’t sure how to) convert the byte array back. I ended up writing a small Java console app to convert it for me.
It’s odd to eliminate using GitHub issues as comments because the user would need a GitHub account then decide on bluesky. Bluesky would also require users to have a Bluesky account? How many readers already have a GitHub account vs already have a Bluesky account?
I mean it’s fine, use whatever your comfortable with and Bluesky is the next frontier for development ideas.
As of this comment, Bluesky has ~38M users. To sign up is trivial, and doesn't constrain you to folks who already have a Github account or would sign up for one (tech weighted). Skate to where the puck is going. I suppose including a link to the Bluesky sign up page near the discussion section of a post would be helpful, for those not yet onboarded who want to immediately discuss or intend to in the future.
EDIT: Ask five people you know outside of tech if they have a Github account. Everyone I know outside of tech moved to Bluesky from Twitter. No one I know outside of tech has a Github account. If I encounter someone who has neither, I'm of course going to recommend a Bluesky account from a utility perspective, as they're likely never going to contribute code, issues, discussion on GH if not a tech person.
(most of my network is non tech, non startup, non SV people, ymmv; HN is the closest I get to tech folks most of the time)
Ehhh the metric for active users is a bit weird. The metric is "daily active likers" but I know a lot of people lurk and don't like posts often. I personally rarely like posts unless I think to go out of my way to do so but I browse the site daily.
And even then while "daily active likers" is down half from 6 months ago, it's still up substantially from even just a month or two prior to that. Bluesky exploded in size at the start of the year and it seems to be finally settling into a steady state with gradual growth (vs the prior explosive growth + falloff).
"Daily records" (at the bottom of the page) is a bit better metric of overall network activity and even though it has also fallen since peak it shows there's still an order of magnitude more activity on network than prior to blowing up.
The puck is not going to bluesky. Ads are back on X. Many who claim to have left have returned. Bluesky is the far leftist version of gab, no matter how you don’t like people saying that.
I’m among that 31M who signed up (as are many of my friends) and only the most left ones are still using it. I trolled for a couple of days until it got boring.
Bluesky is already dying and has 38M registered users to Githubs 225M users. Github is growing, and Bluesky isn't. By your own suggestion, they should have used Github.
You can host your own Bluesky instance and federate across instances, with all the data you host stored in an open an portable format, can you do the same with GitHub?
> Most of California’s single-family house investors are “mom and pop” types, according to BatchData.
> Small-fry owners, with up to five properties nationwide, control 91% of California investment houses.
> The rest is divvied up this way: Owners of six to 10 houses control 4% of California investment houses. Investors with 11 to 50 houses own 3% of this Golden State housing group. And 51 or more? Only 2% of investment houses.
I’m one of those mom and pop owners. The decent ROI on renting out my starter home financed me adding an ADU to the lot, which I also rent out.
I’ve owned the house long enough that I’ve had several tenants churn out when they buy their own houses.
This doesn’t feel like a policy failure, IMO. Renters have the option to live in a free standing home while they save for a down payment, and “investors” have an incentive to increase density/add to the housing stock.
Not everyone is at a point in their life where it makes sense to own a home. It feels weird making a judgement that these people should be required to live in apartments.
I don’t have a problem with it. I pointed it out because it seems to show Blackstone hasn’t bought up all the houses like people think.
People should rent what they can afford and need. Some people need the house with all its space, some only need an apartment.
The big thing is people shouldn’t be spending 50% of their monthly income on rent. It doesn’t help them, their family, or you. Likely, eventually, they’ll have trouble paying, you’ll have to evict them, their lives will be disrupted, their families lives will be disrupted, and you’ll have to spend time evicting them and
finding a new tenant else you’re not making money.
Agreed. I look for tenants that aren’t spending more than a third on rent. At $1300/month, that puts it right on median household income of $48k for the area (this is in rural northern CA).
I have no interest in ever evicting anyone, it sounds like a nightmare for everyone involved. I like my tenants, and my rents go up rarely and below market rate/inflation.
You're completely off the mark on this, and speaking like a landlord.
> This doesn’t feel like a policy failure, IMO. Renters have the option to live in a free standing home while they save for a down payment, and “investors” have an incentive to increase density/add to the housing stock.
First, when you have a renter, your payment is the "mortgage + tax liability + chunk of profit usually 25-50%"
Nobody, except for IT can save in predatory environment like that, no matter how much you wish it so.
And you're double-dipping by having THEM pay your mortgage and handsome profit on top. And for what? A "let them eat cake" comment. Im sure someone paying 50% or more their income can 'save for a mortgage'.
Knowing this scam, by the time they save up 50k, the bank will demand 100k down. But landlords can just capitalize on existing equity. Its a scam, through and through, that punishes renters.
We do need residences. And they're simple to build. They're called "rent controlled apartments". But 'ewww socialism' rears its ugly head.
> "mortgage + tax liability + chunk of profit usually 25-50%"
25-50% is absurdly false.
We own a second home which we've rented out for years (wasn't the original intention, but anyway ...). The rent covers mortgage, taxes, and upkeep. Profit is minimal, less than 10%. Once you factor in eventual renovations, like replacing the roof, floors, etc., there is no profit at all, or very little.
Go read the briefs from the Realpage lawsuit, and maybe you won't consider me much the fool.
I keep getting anecdotes as some sort of glorious rebuttals. No matter. When the people are at their last end and the guillotines come, I will not shed a tear.
Please point me to the brief documenting that those landlords are making 25 - 50% profit.
And I see you showed your true colors with your second comment. I'm sure if the revolution you're praying for actually comes, you'll definitely be in the vanguard!
irrelevant fun fact: people think that the vast majority of those who were visited by Mme La Guillotine during the French Revolution were nobles. In fact, the vast majority, ~85%, were from the "third estate" (commoners, which also excluded clergy).
> your payment is the "mortgage + tax liability + chunk of profit usually 25-50%"
You would have to be yielding 10%+ on your rental to get anything near that. In my part of the world - rent is cheaper than the interest the mortgage would bear.
> First, when you have a renter, your payment is the "mortgage + tax liability + chunk of profit usually 25-50%"
You think landlords make 25 - 50% profit on a SFH rental unit? You're so comically wrong that there's no point in discussing the rest of this post (which is basically a list of every failed housing policy in existence).
Allow builders to build more units. It's that simple, which is part of the problem for some people.
Or in other words, small independent landlords (using that arbitrary 5-house cutoff) own 17.29% of Caliornia houses, and other landlords own 1.71% of California houses.
It would seem but as someone else pointed out it's likely just houses and not multifamily homes. It's not really clear from the web site but it seems like it's just single family homes.
> The project is licensed under an FSL-1.1-Apache-2.0 license which, for two years after release, prevents use, modification and distribution when done in a range of ways which may compete with the original project.
The current license for sentry seems to be a large part of the reason for the nope.
They give a pretty detailed explanation of the decision.
This is my thought on using dotenv libraries. The app shouldn’t have to load environment variables, only read them. Using a dotenv function/plugin like in omz is far more preferable.
The argument often heard though is 'but windows'. Though if windows lacks env (or Cron, or chroot, etc) the solution would be to either move to an env that does support it, or introduce some tooling only for the windows users.
Not build a complex, hierarchical directory scanner that finds and merges all sorts of .env .env.local and whatnots.
On dev I often do use .ENV files, but use zenv or a loadenv tool or script outside of the projects codebase to then load these files into the env.
In a team setting, it can be extremely helpful to have env/config loading logic built into the repo itself. It does not mean it has be loaded by the application process, but it can be part of the surrounding tooling that is part of your codebase.
Yes, that's indeed the right place, IMO: ephemeral tooling that leverages, or simplifies OS features.
Tooling such as xenv, a tiny bash script, a makefile etc. that devs can then replace with their own if they wish (A windows user may need something different from my zsh built-in). That isn't present at all in prod, or when running in k8s or docker compose locally.
A few years ago, I surfaced a security bug in an integrated .env loader that partly leveraged a lib and partly was DIY/NIH code. A dev built something that would traverse up and down file hierarchies to search for .env.* files and merge them runtime and reload the app if it found a new or changed one. Useful for dev. But on prod, uploading a .env.png would end up in in a temp dir that this homebuilt monstrosity would then pick up. Yes, any internet user could inject most configuration into our production app.
Because a developer built a solution to a problem that was long solved, if only he had researched the problem a bit longer.
We "fixed" it by ripping out thousands of LOCs, a dependency (with dependencies) and putting one line back in the READMe: use an env loader like ....
Turned out that not only was it a security issue, it was an inotify hogger, memory hog, and io bottleneck on boot. We could downsize some production infra afterwards.
Yes, the dev built bad software. But, again, the problem wasn't that quality, but the fact it was considered to be built in the first place.
reply