By "Astral" do you mean "Spinel"? Also, what paid services? So far the only paid services they've mentioned is retainer services that essentially amount to priority customer support. The tools themselves are only ever described as free
EDIT: Misread the comment and thought it was only about `rv`, not both `uv` and `rv`
What is Spinel? Astral is the developer of uv, and they have announced their hosted platform service, pyx [0]. It appears it will be FOSS as well, but they'll have a hosted version of it.
What makes you think they _haven't_ tried to work things out with Ruby Central? As per a separate article[1], this seems to be a last resort:
> “Since Ruby Central has informed us they will never allow us to continue working on the projects they now claim they own, that we successfully maintained and operated for the last ten years, the former RubyGems team is launching gem.coop today.”
Some additional context is that Justin Searls is close friends with people who are or have been on Rails Core and/or at Shopify. I've long been a fan of Justin's work, and I've spent time with him at conferences so I can attest to him being a nice person in my experience… But, given the alleged parties at play here, it's hard to take this piece as unbiased when it lacks that disclosure
It's an opinion piece by a trusted member of the community. He doesn't need to act unbiased but be credible and informative. As he wrote in his disclosure:
> People whose livelihood depends on the health of the Ruby ecosystem deserve more information than they're getting, especially now that its operational stability has come under threat.
On this count, Searls' article has done the work. I didn't know that Andre Arko baselessly threatened Google with lawyers, or that Andre played fast-and-loose with people's donations. That information was excluded from "unbiased" analyses and fact-checks which seem to largely target Andre's enemies.
The problem is not that Searls has opinions, it's that this petty hit piece against Andre was heavily wrapped in neutral, 'all I can do is offer a little bit of context', 'I'm not rushing to take sides' framing language, resulting in a disingenuous, passive-aggressive tone.
Why is Justin dredging up that one time eight years ago when Andre mistakenly called out a repo for infringing upon his employer's work (for which he publicly apologized five hours later)? Why is he harping on anecdotes from nine years ago in order to suggest Andre may have allegedly (gasp) expensed technology purchases and business meals to his employer? What does this all have to do with the current situation, other than unnecessarily stir the pot with a laundry list of old petty grievances fed to him by a bunch of anonymous contacts ('a lot of different people told me a lot of concerning stories')?
I think the author's close ties to Rails Core / Shopify employees is extremely important context for this post, especially since it's context that's been intentionally hidden by a neutral, unbiased framing.
Someone vibe coded a PR on my team where there were hundreds of lines doing complex validation of an uploaded CSV file (which we only expected to have two columns) instead of just relying on Ruby's built-in CSV library (i.e. `CSV.parse` would have done everything the AI produced)
Ask it to write tests, then let it run until the tests pass (preferably in a sandbox, far from your git credentials). It is quite good at developing hypotheses and tests for them, if that is what you explicitly ask for. It doesn’t have (much) ego, so it doesn’t care if it is proven wrong and will accept any outcome fairly if it is testable. Although sometimes it comes to the wrong conclusion and doubles down that the fact should be true so it prepares to write and publish a library to make it true
Sorry! Didn't mean to BS you. I've not come across a scenario where it hallucinated me with a non-existent library. Can you share what you were trying to do when that happened?
I wish I had the transcript. I don't, and I'm afraid that the passage of time has muddied the interaction to the point of uselessness (when it comes to listing specifics).
Craft coffee is a luxury item that isn't part of Japanese culture in the same way that it is in the west. In the early morning, when you're a salaryman trying to get to work as fast as possible, you get coffee from a vending machine or convenience store. Craft coffee is something to enjoy leisurely, which is why most specialty coffee shops don't open until much later than we're used to
Thanks. I guessed that. I got downvoted so I assume people think I am complaining. I am not. Just observing and curious as to why they open later I assume there are different rituals and I never found out. Thanks for replying!
> Our API is a Ruby on Rails application. For all public-facing models, we have added a `public_id` column to our database. We still use standard auto-incrementing BigInts for our primary key. The `public_id` is only used as an external identifier.
Their office has an entire team dedicated to physical security. If you're walking around by yourself and you don't have an employee badge, they find you pretty quick.
Maybe, just maybe, in the last 10-20 years when this trend for flakey salt has taken off. Any recipe you see older than 10 years I would safely bet that they meant table salt, and I would still recommend using table salt unless otherwise specified on anything more recent, that goes triple for any baking recipes. Again, unless for finishing.
Of course if the recipe specifies weight rather than volume, the point is moot.
And speaking as a former fine dining line cook, any food writer specifying kosher for anything other than fininshing/curing is a dolt IMO :)
Flakey salt is not the same as kosher salt. I just flipped through my four most used cookbooks and they all say "salt measurements are for kosher salt" in the preface somewhere. Three of them specify diamond crystal.
I've also got a coffee table book written in 1999 that says the same.
Agreed. Kosher salt is mainly not flaky, it just has slightly larger granules than table salt. I think the poster above might be conflating some of the flakier salts you can get which might also be kosher with standard kosher salt.
I think the main reason people go for kosher salt in recipes, cooking, and even baking is that it doesn’t taste of iodine. Table salt with iodine tastes slightly metallic, which will basically make your food taste worse. I’m an amateur cool, but you can simply taste the difference, so why make food taste worse/weirdly metallic?
I defy you to taste the difference between iodized and not in a blind test. All else being equal of course, size and shape differences would be a giveaway. So equal mass dissolved in water.
You can taste a slight difference between iodized and non iodized salt on its own but I very strongly doubt anyone would be able to detect that difference once the salt has been added to anything.
In the UK the term isn't used, iodine is not (or it's so rare I've never seen/heard of it, and can't find an example now) added ever, and anti-caking agent is only added if it's marketed as a table salt.
In the UK, iodine is added to cattle feed instead of salt, so it's contained in dairy products. No idea whether this can be a problem for vegans.
"Kosher salt" isn't a thing this side of the pond (at least in Germany). Even regular coarse salt is not something you can expect to find in an average kitchen.
Exactly, same here (also Suisse). It boggles my mind why would anybody use any other type of salt for anything, I guess lessons from primary school about iodine and its roles are long forgotten.
I never ever felt any bad taste from iodized salts. Had to actually google what kosher salt means, the connection with real kosher food is 0 and it seems purely US term.
There are whole articles about why you should never use iodized salts... seriously wtf
You typically use different types of salt based on the size/shape of the grains. You want something larger and hollow for finishing, because it gives a nice texture, as an example.
Every time I get the chance, I take a small amount of kosher salt (which is just salt used for koshering, not salt that is kosher) and a small amount of iodized salt and have visitors do a taste test. I've never had someone prefer the iodized salt, and they can always tell the difference between the two.
Maybe they have different labels in different countries, though.
> McDonald's offers a 401k plan with up to 7% match. Even if you took the 10% early withdrawal penalty this is money in your pocket.
This woman is literally living paycheck to paycheck, and your suggestion is to... put money into a 401k? That simply isn't an option for people living in poverty like this.
> Gain knowledge, skills, and have a good work ethic and it is not that hard to get ahead in America.
This is a really out-of-touch perspective. One's ability to gain knowledge and skills is determined by the amount of free time they have when not working, and when you're only earning $9.50/hr, you have to spend a _lot_ of your time just earning enough to scrape by. It _is_ hard to get ahead in America when you're poor. Lifting oneself out of poverty is not easy to do here (or anywhere). If it were, we wouldn't have nearly 30% of our country's inhabitants living in or very near to poverty levels.
>> I'm probably going to catch some flak, but I see some optimizations she can make.
> This woman is literally living paycheck to paycheck, and your suggestion is to... put money into a 401k? That simply isn't an option for people living in poverty like this.
Another optimization she could make is to save the money she spends on food for herself and her family. It won't be easy, but after a few years of not eating she could probably save up enough learn to code and pull herself up by her bootstraps. /s
> I know it's unpopular to say, but most poor people are poor for reasons related to their genes, personality and upbringing, not because of the system.
Some kind of implied false dichotomy here. Is upbringing unrelated to the system?
I won't say it's entirely decoupled but yes, it's mostly separate, I'm talking about the values that you learn from your parents and social peers as a child/teenager.
I'm saying she puts it in and takes it out as soon as she can. This gives her more disposable income. The only issue I see is the time it takes her to make the first distribution, but then she shouldn't have any issues with lagging income if she budgets it properly.
It's not that out of touch. She doesn't have to work at McDonald's. I know there's opportunities out there that pay better and are in LCOL areas, but they have to be pursued.
I'm sorry, but I can't empathize when I read through an article and the only thing she is doing to better her situation is use the power of government to force someone to pay her more. I gave actionable advice that she herself has the power to act on to improve her situation.
The 401K administrators wouldn't allow this scheme of yours to be feasible. When you open a 401K account and start contributing to it, you can't just keep withdrawing from it at regular intervals like you suggest. At most you can make a one time loan against a balance that exists in your account if you want to keep using the account without closing it. You have to pay this loan amount back with interest--you're paying yourself back with interest, but still when you're in poverty paying anything back in excess of what you started out with is just another hardship.
If you opt to take a loan against your 401K, then you will be required to re-pay back the loaned amount through regular paycheck deductions until it is paid back, and you aren't permitted to take another loan until this first loan is repaid in full. Furthermore, a number of 401K plans that have employer matching typically have some form vesting requirements before those funds can be accessed; often a year or more.
Regardless, in this scheme withdrawing any amount (i.e. making a loan and not repaying that loan, or withdrawing funds and closing the account) will end up losing her money in the end given that McDonald's is only matching up to 7% while withdrawing early from the account incurs a mandatory 10% early withdrawal fee that 401K administrators are required to levy and report to the IRS.
How does putting in $100, getting a $7 match, and immediately pulling it out and paying a $10.70 penalty on the withdrawal leave her with more disposable income? (She avoids income tax on the $100, but then pays tax on the withdrawal so if they happen in the same year, that’s also a wash.)
I literally can’t see how this tactic helps her in any way.
It's a dollar for dollar match on up to 7% of pay. Let's say she makes $100. She puts in $7 and her employer also puts in $7. That's $14, and upon early withdraw she would pay $1.40 (penalty) + income tax (likely $0). She would come out with an additional $5.60.
Additional note: Only plan participants 59.5 or older are eligible to make in-service withdrawals (as are terminated employees, of course). Probably not a viable income augmentation plan for most.
EDIT: Misread the comment and thought it was only about `rv`, not both `uv` and `rv`