I personally have no qualms about one criminal extorted by another, specially if their fued is making world better for everyone.

https://www.haproxy.com/blog/route-ssh-connections-with-hapr...

from the blog

> Did you know that you can proxy SSH connections through HAProxy and route based on hostname?

But if I interpret the question with line of thinking "should I anticipate right/ full answers despite incorrect/ incomplete inputs?" I think Baggage was pointing out the problem in the logic why such questions should arise.

I would expect the question to be phrased "under what circumstances the machine with provide wrong outputs?", and would have hoped for Babbage (or may be anyone) explaining many ways how things could go wrong.

I guess many of us quality for british parliament.

I guess it's futile to argue in this circular logic when full picture is not considered and argument are being put forward only for the sake of winning argument. Have a good $time_of_day.

this guy's forked MIT'd version 0 will be as real and valid as version 6 of original chardet.

instead of

> Your fork of version 6 is just as real and valid as the MIT'd version 7!

Supporting for a decade is not a basis for unilateral takeover. In last 3 months there seem to be at least 3 other active contributors, any many dozens in past, who share the copyright on parts (ownership)

> nobody is entitled to this guy's pip account or GitHub account just because he rewrote the library

this guy's also not entitled to takeover what is communal, exactly in the same manner.

Someone answered it long ago in quite some details. Feel free to have a look: https://stackoverflow.com/a/11455485

First reason would be use the "name recall", and second guess would be to do another rug-pull to re-licence under some other conditions.

> It's owned by the maintainer

This is completely in-correct. GPL and variants (FOSS, not OSS) were meant to make software free of "any ownership".

my understanding of the situation is:

Is the caretaker paying from his own pocket to maintain the hall? no

Is the caretaker paying from his own pocket for community usage of the hall? no

Is the caretaker spending time to maintain the community hall? yes

Is caretaker obliged to spend time on community hall? no

Is caretaker free to stop spending time on community hall? yes.

Is caretaker free to raze current hall, build new hall on same ground for new purposes WITH community agreement? YES

Is caretaker free to raze current hall, build new hall on same ground for new purposes WITHOUT community agreement (even if paying all the bill)? NO

Is caretaker free to build another similar hall someplace else? YES

Reasoning of your comment is of someone who is hell bent on staking claims on community resources (like big companies) without having slightest concern of the wishes or well-being of the community. Not sure of the commenter's motive either, given the new account with just two comments, supporting such blatant disregard of basic human decency.

It should be perfectly ok (by maintainer or anyone for that mater) to be inspired from a community project and build something from scratch hand-crafting/ AI sloping, as long as the imitation is given a new name/ identity.

What rubbed me off personally was maintainer saying "pin your dependncies to version 6.0.0 or 5.x.x", as if maintainer owns the project. maintainer role is more akin to serve the community, not rule.

If it is completely new, why not start a new project with new name? No one will object. And of course leave the old project behind to whoever is willing to maintain it. And if the new name project is better, people will follow.

I first hand saw in, AWS devDays, an AI giving SIWINCH as "root-cause" of Apache error in a containerized process is in EKS for a backend FCGI process connection error. It has been extremely hard since that demo to trust any AI for system level debugging.

Businesses don't care for the careful minority when they know such advices will be shared, silencing those who really care.

Even the feature name "parental control" is chosen to induce guilt in parents.

Now question is..

is AI providing solutions smarter than the developer using it might have produced?

And perhaps more importantly, How much time it takes AI to write code and human to debug it, even if both are producing equally smart solutions.

Only when I checked the passenger reservation list, I found this was train from yesterday, late by 23:50 hours.

(for the curious... No, I could not get my reserved birth and had to travel on unreserved ticket, but at least I reached destination on my planned time.)

It's not final yet, but interesting development.

Feels more like peer pressure induced post, than evaluating a tool critically for pros and cons.

> Claude Code has this effect where you KNOW it's good but can't quite say WHY.

Definitely gives the "vibe" of social media's infinite scroll induced dopamine rush.

Overall, this post just seems to be enforcing the idea that "fuzzy understanding of business domain will be enough to get a mature product using some AI, and the AI will somehow magically figure out most non-functional requirements and missing details of business domain". Thing is that figuring out "most non-functional requirements and missing details of business domain" is where most of the blood and sweat goes.

Congratulations!! You could try consultancy, training others, writing books/ blogs.