plus, it's a huge headache to run and not very profitable. github mostly makes money on ci/cd, but a github alternative wouldn't benefit from that: anyone migrating would inherently evaluate other ci/cd vendors. plus, github eats a ton of network egress, which is very expensive. the only people who could eat the cost are the other clouds: gcp, aws, cloudflare, etc. but it feels dubiously beneficial for them.

Compare China's urban areas to Asia's other major developing nations: Jakarta, Bangkok, Manila. China can do much better, but there's also much, much worse urban planning out there.

While unfortunate for consumers, it cleans up the offerings. For four years, I didn't buy FSD because Autopilot was good enough to cover highway driving and I couldn't justify $99/month for the "last mile". If you strip out Autopilot and given the latest FSD, I would 100% buy the FSD subscription.

Removing the lifetime purchase option also simplified my mental model. Before, I was always stressed that if I bought a few months, loved FSD, and then bought the lifetime, I would have "wasted" those few months. Plus, every month I owned the car yet didn't buy lifetime FSD made it worth "less" to me: I'd eventually sell the car, so I'd missed out on those few months of usage.

I do wish Tesla offered a price lock: so long as you maintain your FSD subscription, your price is guaranteed for 5 years. Otherwise, it does feel scary: I spend 50k on a car for its FSD and over time, they jack the price to $200 or $500/month. Also, if they jack up FSD prices and then lower base car prices, your Tesla's value decreases effectively, which feels even worse.

"No mainstream economists touch this problem" because it's a damn hard problem without painless solutions.

"In vain do I protest that there are historical and geopolitical reasons motivating the desire, that chip fabs cannot be violently seized, and anyway that Beijing has coveted Taiwan for approximately seven decades before people were talking about AI."

Consider the historical timeline: "Fortress China" policies coincide with the rise of American protectionism on both sides of the aisle and the introduction of chip restrictions and punishing tariffs. Taiwan is an emotional/nationalist issue for China, but it's only one part of their policy, not the lynchpin as your comment suggests.

His point is that Elon may promise more than he delivers, but he has still delivered on quite a lot.

Yelp suffered greatly in the early 2010s when Google started putting Google Maps listings (and their accompanying reviews) in their search results.

OpenAI will eventually unify their products as well.

The initial conversation was about how Nat was likely leaving because his contract ran out. The counterpoint was that he was from the Microsoft side and therefore he didn't have a retention contract. I brought up Xamarin because he was likely under a retention contract from that acquisition.

That being said, these contracts probably had little to no effect on his decision though, as I'm sure he would have made more money than he could spend in a lifetime regardless of whether he had stayed or not.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24670252

Points: 181

# Comments: 118

'mastering' is an artifact of vinyl and boxed software. Now that a lot of software is continuously tested and shipped, 'master' is not the right word for those processes. Even if you're shipping on-premise software, there rarely is a single 'master' copy anymore.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mastering_(audio)

As a side note, I've seen people try this, but there is no amount of testing that can guarantee stability. So, 'stable' feels like a false promise. Also, in the event of a bug causing downtime, _someone_ always has the ability to push directly to master and it's always possible that a fix might break a new commit's tests, even if it fixes the downtime.

"What branch are you on?" "I branched off the main development branch for this fix." "Like...the `main` main branch or the main branch for the feature?"

I like redis' rename of their default branch to `unstable`. Just like commits are tagged with the release numbers, the latest code that isn't yet versioned is by default 'unstable'. If the industry as a whole is going to make this change, I would prefer we choose a name that can be unambiguously referenced in conversation.