<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: handstitched</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=handstitched</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Sun, 21 Jun 2026 08:24:13 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=handstitched" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "Electric motors with no rare earths"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's a small difference, but if you had a choice between "more efficient AND less maintenance" and "less efficient and more maintenance" then it's easy to see why the permanent-magnet solution is preferred.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2026 02:52:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48512310</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48512310</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48512310</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "MacBook Neo"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's been possible since Big Sur at least, the method for enabling it just changed woth Sonoma</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2026 02:48:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47256880</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47256880</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47256880</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "Show HN: GitDelivr: A free CDN for Git clones built on Cloudflare Workers and R2"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> You don't have to trust us. Git itself verifies every object by hash on the client side. If we flip a byte, git fsck rejects the entire pack.<p>If I were to run 'git clone <a href="https://gitdelivr.net/$repoUrl" rel="nofollow">https://gitdelivr.net/$repoUrl</a>` then I would also be getting the Git repository metadata through GitDelivr. You could return any valid git repo, eg. just add one commit on top of the real main with a malicious buildscript. I dont see how this security model works at all?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 02 Mar 2026 11:24:07 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47216553</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47216553</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47216553</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "Spotlighting the World Factbook as We Bid a Fond Farewell"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Look at the wikipedia page for any given country, and I guarantee you that it cites the CIA World Factbook at least once (and probably several times [1] ). Saying "we don't need the world factbook because we have Wikipedia" is completely ridiculous.<p>Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, meaning it's not a primary source of facts but rather an aggregate of information published elsewhere.<p>[1] - some examples: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australia</a> - cites the factbook 4 times; <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbekistan" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uzbekistan</a> - cites it twice</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 06 Feb 2026 10:19:54 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46911121</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46911121</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46911121</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "Improving the usability of C libraries in Swift"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This was a great read. I've used the naive approach shown in the first example before and its always felt a bit clunky, but I wasnt aware of most of these language features. I'm definitely going to try this out next time I have to write C bindings</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 23 Jan 2026 02:24:58 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46727591</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46727591</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46727591</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "French supermarket's Christmas advert is worldwide hit (without AI) [video]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> secular culture is literally dying<p>Can you elaborate on this? It doesn't match my experience at all.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2025 16:54:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46245942</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46245942</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46245942</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "Everyone in Seattle hates AI"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>> To me, any software engineer who tries an LLM, shrugs and says “huh, that’s interesting” and then “gets back to work” is completely failing at their actual job, which is using technology to solve problems.<p>I would argue that the "actual job" is simply to solve problems. The client / customer ultimately do not care what technology you use. Hell, they don't really care if there's technology at all.<p>And a lot of software engineers have found that using an LLM doesn't actually help solve problems, or the problems it <i>does</i> solve are offset by the new problems it creates.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2025 22:09:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46140901</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46140901</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46140901</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by handstitched in "NPM debug and chalk packages compromised"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>OP <i>is</i> the developer & maintainer of the affected packages, so the attacker was able to use their phished credentials to upload compromised versions to NPM.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 12:22:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45196610</link><dc:creator>handstitched</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45196610</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45196610</guid></item></channel></rss>