I wish HN had a way to save a story without upvoting it or showing it publicly on your profile (the "favorite" feature implemented right now), like Reddit's "Save". Many times I'm interested in something to check out later but it's not something worth upvoting (like this story, based on other comments) and I want my interests to stay private.
This issue is better solved externally - using a bookmark manager. It would allow you to have all your "read later" links in one place rather than being scattered over different websites. Personally I use Safari's reading list feature for that.
Quite a few people were unhappy when twitter renamed "favorite" to "like" because they had used it as a bookmark and did not want to imply advocacy. Seems like both intents could be supported fairly easily.
No, Watch emails you a bunch. Stars just show up in a list so you can find it later. That being said, public bookmarks always seemed weird to me. Why not just actually bookmark it with your browser? Not that it matters.
App provide better UI and UX for mobile devices. It's faster, easier to navigate (bottom navigation) and some features work in it which don't on the mobile site (I can't remember which views force desktop view).
I know, that's what I'm saying. We were talking about stars and then you said I should look into Watches instead, but what I was saying is that I don't like watches because you get emails. Customizing which emails doesn't help with that. Apologies if I was confused about something.
You may want to revise your judgement, GitHub added support to watch on "custom events", such as: new issues, new PRs, new releases, etc. You might want to try again.
Probably because needs--and therefore tooling--is constantly evolving. IME the subtle differences add up too. Trying to maintain conformance to convention is itself something of a rat race.
My experience over the past year mirrors this. I'm regularly surprised that there aren't more generally-accepted and boosted solutions to lots of the minutiae that comes with DevOps/cloud config. CloudFormation and Terraform are both pretty bare bones - they give you tools to describe any cloud resource and the way they relate to eachother. That's great! But I'd rather not be left in charge of defining how cloud resources can securely communicate - I'd rather include an AWS/HashiCorp-supported module that predefines configuration for adding a Redis cache to something, or letting only certain resources connect to a database.
Terraform modules were a nice start, but I've pretty much never seen a module I would trust using. It may just be my own bad luck, but the vast majority of the TF Modules I've looked at are A.) A single maintainer, B.) 10 stars or less, C.) Haven't been updated in 6 months. The combination of the above 3 do not leave me feeling confident in including a library. I wish that there was an easier way to tread the paths of those that have done the work.
I can offer one, DebOps[1]. It's a git monorepo that contains a set of Ansible roles and playbooks that can be used to manage Debian-based servers, VMs or containers. It's designed in such a way that almost every configuration option can be overridden from the Ansible inventory - you are not expected to modify the monorepo itself, so that you can get updates over time, but you can still customize the result to your needs. Playbooks and roles are developed in the open, all the secrets and inventory configuration is private.
I don't know how related this is to the OP, but I do agree, and I think a big part of the answer is just how young all these tools are. I wouldn't be surprised if 5 or 10 years from now, infrastructure and software deployments are "solved" to the same degree as IDEs or web browsers are today.
I bought a guitar, TV went unused, sold it, less gadget worry. Bought more guitars!
I’ve dramatically slashed my personal gadget footprint. Phone, watch cause I like the exercise data, a Linux box I barely touch, old iPad for movies and video chat.
I pickup the guitar rather than sit at the TV or computer. Learning an instrument connects both sides of the brain like no other skills based activity.
No ads, acoustic road trips easy enough, no worry about charging, smart speakers would hear some bad covers of Wonder Wall.
It’s a life changing experience.
So when the TV breaks, maybe consider replacing it with $500 digital piano to get weighted keys and decent built in sound instead of paying for an ad distribution device.
Kinda, its an app that trains people to tune guitars in different scenarios. The ads are mostly for pro versions of itself, its sibling apps and a far field mike array for adjusting tuning based on the room. The killer feature is artificial intelligence that learns how the person perceives sound and adjusts the tuning from "technically correct" to "perceptually correct." It is gamified with a blockchain verified leaderboard.
Cheating devalues games. Ambiguity heightens absurdity. Maybe I should have added that the IP has rock solid patents, is open source* and the startup is still in stealth while raising a series G.
* some restrictions apply, please agree to the terms of service to allow super cookies and review that the license SKU matching your service region to a stacked arbitration regime established in the People's Democratic Republic of Korea and Delaware
Relative counterpoint - I'm an online student, all of my classes require a PC, all of my homework requires a PC. My orchestra requires I listen to and play along with recordings (on a PC). The minimum 'personal gadget footprint' for me and many others is going to be quite high. Above a certain level, IoT is unavoidable.
Shantytowns have been growing across the US for almost 30 years.
Unions are just formalized reality, like fiscal economics, politics, etc
IMO, while we may not live to see it, I’m pretty sure out last 100-150 years of economic thought is, big picture style, on its way out.
It may take decades but once everyone is a gig worker, the political argument for universal healthcare will be undeniable.
IMO that’s more in-line with someone like Adam Smith, whose only condition for a market was free movement of workers between a market of opportunity.
This has somehow been mutated into a market of goods and services, probably out of laziness.