Linux has been daily driver for ever, I have never, in my 30+ years run windows as my main desktop (went from DOS directly to linux, slackware at that time). I hate things being forced on me, changing out from under - its very disruptive.

Linux Mint - just works. And has been for a long long time. Thanks to a small, brilliant, sensible, stable team.

Zero load shedding, on-site within 10 minutes typically in case of fault reports, ALL supply lines underground. Planned maintenance schedules communicated week+ in advance (rare, once every few years).

  10 PRINT "my first name"

Math + real world observation -> science

In anycase, then they should document it clearly that they have unacceptable insertion latency in india and the free plan is entirely unusable for india. Instead of advertising '10 pops in india!!'

I am guessing the real reason (and at this point I am discounting incompetence - this has been true for years, so they are aware). You switch to the pro plan for the zone and everything now routes within india, 100s of milliseconds of latency saved.

Its even worse for workers and workers AI and embedding search. I found multiple seconds of latency, all vanishing the moment the zone is on pro plan (It seems R2, workers, workers AI - none of them are deployed in an India POP - unconfirmed, of course, cause there is no way to actually communicate with cloudflare).

Now 25$/month isn't much - though it does change calculations compared to "FREE!!" - but I would have liked to know this going in, instead of discovering this after having made the commitment. Seems like a deliberate dark pattern, to force people into the pro plan.

Shame, really - I love the CF stack(workers and DO are just so fantastic to build on), but these shenanigans, plus the utter refusal to provide ANY level of support, keep souring me on them.

For editing files, it again seems to prefer writing small python scripts, rather than read the file and rewrite it (even small files, like notes). This again causes it to constantly miss duplications, inconsistencies, etc.

And from 4.8 to 5, it doubled down on this. At this point not moderately-long-horizon task is getting done consistently, due to its pigeon-hole view of the workdir.

Anybody else notice this?

I am now looking at 9 to 10x the app code, for non trivial stuff. And this is not just the usual unit/integration/e2e suites too. Extensive deadcode, field use, code shape tests (ast walking) - god objects, 15-param helpers, wrapper-piled-upon-wrapper, badly named (a skill) functions/methods/objects, path-dependent artifacts, etc. There is no way I could have written all this manually.

It doesn't guarentee high quality OR reliability or readability or maintainability, but does reduce churn and makes me feel a bit more confident about deploying route A work product in prod.

These are basic: they work for human coders and are typically quick to setup. But gates at this level are far from enough for agentic coding. You need an extensive test suite/e2e suite/benchmark suite. Typically much larger than the code base itself: This is what enables those "i ported bun to rust in a weekend" headlines. Where ever such extensive 'gates', high quality ones, already exist, the agent can do a good job of making things work, cause it can automatically iterate.

But: every hole, every gap in coverage, will be eventually found by the coding agent and 'exploited'. So you need full, extensive coverage.

This suite itself is a LOT of work, much more than what it would be if you only had to worry about human coders. So if YOU are writing the gates yourself, you are going to fall between A and B: you still have a convoluted, unreliable, impossible-to-reason-about prod app, AND it still took you eons to build it cause you spent that time writing the gates. This is no win at all, on either front.

Where gates, extensive ones, help in route A is they can significantly reduce the churn/spinning, fix-x-break-y, to just the parts that are gaps in coverage (which the agent will keep finding at a ridiculous rate). And your work would be to have it ALSO keep filing in those gaps with more tests/etc.

One of the reasons go coding with agents works better than other langs is cause I even include AST based enforcements in my governance suite. Its still route A, but with somewhat more confidence, somewhat less frustration.

1. It writes SO MUCH code, in minutes, that theres no way I as a human can review it.

2. I am not very motivated to read/review this code anyway: it was cheaply written, by some _thing_ that is not going to improve from my feedback.

3. If you DO review it conscientiously , it becomes a never ending thing: you keep finding issue upon issue.

4. If you report the issues for fixes, the fixes normally fix that immediate issue, and typically add another parallel path/another option/another 100-odd lines of code, instead of a structural fix.

5. If the code base is large, and if you let AI write a meaningful amount of code in it, its no longer _your_ code. You lose the depth+width of understanding needed to reason thru things mentally, cause you no longer KNOW enough about the code.

6. If you do review seriously, and either fix things yourself, or have the ai/harness fix the issues for you, the rounds of fixes take so long, if you look back you realize it would have been better to just do it yourself in the first place.

My personal opinion there are really only two choices:

A. If you want to build FAST, using an agent, just let the agent write tests, validations, extensively, have it keep running them (it likes to call them gates), and just let it loose. Give up on the idea that its your code, and that you understand it. The bottom line becomes: does it work, and WHEN it breaks in weird ways, just use the agent to find and fix the issue (probably breaking something else in the process).

B. limit AI use for non trivial, prod-quality projects to limited research, very tiny targeted changes, write most of the code yourself still, and review every line. You won't get much speedup, maybe 20-30%, but it will still be YOUR code, and you will still be able to reason about it.

https://gist.github.com/abgoyal/bde7af4ba0ba4d19094361667dac...

Shows the 5h and weekly usage %, when it resets, current model, estimated spend in the session, context used, cwd and project.

Save it in .claude/ and then add a snippet to settings.json:

  "statusLine": {
      "type": "command",
      "command": "bash $HOME/.claude/statusline-command.sh"
    }

India has still not permitted starlink to start ops.

If your (taxable) income is less than 7L (inr), no tax is assessed. If your income is greater than 7L, but upto 12L, tax is assessed, but a tax _rebate_ (a discount on payable tax) is granted for the exact amount of tax owed. This means net tax paid till 12L is zero. But if your income is 12L + 1, this rebate no longer applies, so the entire tax assessed (on the 7L+ income) is now due. This means that a person who earns 12L+1 INR makes ~70K inr less, post-tax, than the person who earns 12L INR.

After complaints, to correct this, they added another layer: If your taxable income is >12L but less than 12L+~70K (the tax thats due), then the maximum tax due is just the amount your income exceeds 12L bye. So you stagnate at the same post-tax salary from 12L to 12L+70K.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48344541

Points: 1

# Comments: 0

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48176331

Points: 1

# Comments: 0