Disaster's a possibility. But if an idea has a 1% chance of success, "just say no" usually assures failure, whereas "just say yes" is a shot at that 1% chance.

Love the concept of the 'just-say-yes' engineer vs 'just-say-no' engineer (and corresponding prioritisation of MTTR over MTBF).

I'm definitely a 'just-say-yes' with the caveat that bad architectural choices can be super painful to fix later, and features become a lot harder to fix when they have users as opposed to before launch (so I'm a little bit 'just-say-no', or at least 'just-think-for-a-bit-first').

I also think the balance between 'just-say-yes' and 'just-say-no' really depends a lot on the project. If it's finance or healthcare, perhaps 'no' by default is best. But if it's a silly startup idea, YOLO.

For small teams it could be as simple as everyone agreeing to ensure tests pass on main before pushing to prod.

But Ronnie's opponent fouled at the start, which meant Ronnie was given the ability to nominate any coloured ball as though it were a red ball. He nominated the green as the free ball and sunk it as if it were a red (scoring 1 point), then potted the black (7 points). So he had an extra 8 points right at the start.

Then he managed to sink a red (1 point) followed by the black (7 points) a total of 13 times, and a red followed by the pink (6 points) twice.

8 + 145 = 153 (highest ever).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48283568

Points: 2

# Comments: 1

Say a disaster happens and someone pushes to main without running tests, 9 times out of 10 it will be of ~zero consequence (either the code works first time, it was a cosmetic change that hardly affected users etc).

I know there are horror stories and CI/CD would have prevented some of those, but IME they're just not that common nor severe for small operations, and even when they happen, only a small subset are irreversible/unfixable.

Reasonable concern. In ~10 years of indy development, I haven't forgotten to run tests before pushing to main, ever. So setting up and maintaining complicated machinery to solve a problem that could (but never has) happened doesn't justify taking focus off other more important things, namely building.

The benefit probably increases with team size (I'm a team of 1, so I appreciate the luxury of being able to dodge CI/CD entirely).

So why are Actions so unreliable anyway? Occam's Razor would probably suggest the domain is inherently complex/difficult; but other providers show that reliability is possible. What would Occam's Razor suggest next? Poor management..?

> It's expected to be the largest IPO ever...but the prospectus shows just how much the IPO depends on expectations for future growth

Same goes for every IPO. One point of difference about SpaceX is those involved do have a track record for delivery.

So instead of scalpers trying to simply get to the front of the queue, they'll be automating plays on spotify (hogging bandwidth, something spotify is already stingy with), and 'sharing' tracks with others, meaning it incentivises spam and fake activity.

Probably not a big issue to be fair, and if it only works legitimately 10% of the time it's still a win.

But if there's one company that can take a decent idea and execute poorly, it's Spotify.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48218000

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

> Thousands of FiveThirtyEight articles seemingly vanish from the internet

https://www.editorandpublisher.com/stories/thousands-of-five...

And discussions here on hn:

ABC News has taken all FiveThirtyEight articles offline https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48152553

Disney erased FiveThirtyEight (article by Nate himself) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48197703

Wonder if the male killer is of the same bloodline? Lions often opportunistically kill offspring of other males to reduce competition for their own offspring and to bring females into estrous.

EDIT: FWIW I asked claude and it says

> Gray seals have a promiscuous, harem-based mating system, but paternity is diffuse and males don't guard specific females long-term the way lions do. A bull has little way of "knowing" which pups are his rivals' offspring vs. his own.

So seems unlikely (according to claude).

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48166352

Points: 3

# Comments: 1

Today, it goes for $89/month - a 78% price reduction in just a couple of years

I can only guess this is due to market saturation due to it being relatively low-hanging fruit for startups to nibble at.

Such a dramatic fall in price makes me wonder if the end-game is a price war which sees all SaaS prices fall, potentially to $0 for those with low/no switching cost

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48130604

Points: 2

# Comments: 11