With all due respect, did you read the article... ? I'm not sure how you take that away from it at all. It says rather explicitly that both top down and bottom up are valid approaches.
You're thinking of open source projects that only need a few hours of work per week. Anything more than a few hours a week either requires someone to give up their full time job to work on it (switch to part time jobs/consultation is an option), or having multiple contributors which still require significant effort to coordinate at the end of the day.
Let's say Tailwind CSS gives up and stops the project, do you think there'll be someone else picking it up, knowing how Tailwind failed in the first place? LLMs don't create new things, they remix what are already available. It's delusional to think that you should use LLMs to create a whole UI library just for your application and spend enormous effort not only maintaining it but also train new team members to use it down the road.
Open source is charity, it's unreasonable, even entitled, to demand someone work on it full time without pay.
In my experience, people are willing to contribute up to 10 hours/week to individual volunteer projects they care about. That may increase to up to 20 hours/week for a year or two when they assume a key role.
A full-time job takes a third of your waking hours. Then you probably need to spend another third on various maintenance activities, leaving you with the equivalent of a full-time job to spend as you see fit.
Of course, when you have a volunteer-run project, your priorities will be different from projects that people do for a living. You will probably focus on what the contributors find interesting or important, rather than what someone else might find useful or valuable.
Open source is charity, it's unreasonable, even entitled, to demand someone work on it full time without pay
Of course, but equally it's also unreasonable and entitled to assume that if you work on it full time (or any time at all) that that work deserves or will receive a fair (or any) financial return. That's not what open source is about, and the featured post seems to miss that.
The crazier part is a reddit post on AWS was made for someone releasing a $3 a month closed source version of this, that received a lot of traction, but a bit of flack for being closed source was made 3 hours before the first commit. This guy 100% took the idea and the open source parts and recreated it to post here. Look at the readme and compare them. It is almost a 1:1 copy of the other. This dude is hella sketch. And if this is getting traction we are cooked as developers.
That someone would be you (I saw that Reddit post: https://www.reddit.com/r/aws/comments/1q3ik9z/i_made_a_termi...). I'm not sure I would describe the collective response as having "a lot of traction"; most respondents panned both the price and the closed-source nature of the offering.
What you're learning here is that there's not really a viable market for simple, easily replicable tools. People simply won't pay for them when they can spin up a Claude session, build one in a few hours (often unattended!), and post it to GitHub.
Real profit lies in real value. In tooling, value lies in time or money saved, plus some sort of moat that others cannot easily cross. Lick your wounds and keep innovating!
Please dont open source your code if you’re going to call people hella sketch for deriving from it. Did he violate your license? Attack that action, not the person doing open source.
It is indeed not open sourced, as the repo only has a README and a download script. The "open source" they are referring to I think is the similar README convention.
> And the folder structure is almost an exact mirror of mine
Even though Rust has patterns on how to organize source code, similar folder structure is unlikely, particularly since the original code is not public so it would have to be one hell of a coincidence. (the funniest potential explanation for this would be that both people used the same LLMs to code the TUI app)
It looks like the first commit was just a squash and merge, I probably would never trust a public commit history as some kind of source of truth anyways. I'm curious what your issue is?
> I probably would never trust a public commit history as some kind of source of truth
What _would_ you trust as a source of truth for source code if not a public commit log? I agree that a squash commit’s timestamp in particular ought not be taken as authoritative for all of the changes in the commit, but commit history in general feels like the highest quality data most projects will ever have.
I really hate when cryptocurrency has valid applications but in this case, you're looking for a public adversarial append only log system which is what a blockchain is.
Same here. I developed desktop applications for 15+ years and was really frustrated with Microsoft's direction for the UI around the time of Windows Phone. While Windows Forms may not be the best, it worked for decades until then. Now even if someone wants to build a desktop application using native UI, it's next to no resource at all because it's all about cross platform nowadays.
Funny, but I am not a Russian troll. I am in fact native to West Europe and have to face the consequences of this bullshit (including rising energy prices) every single day.
Sounds like me:
1. For new UI/tool, I depend on text to navigate.
2. Once I'm more familiar, I scan using icons first then text to confirm.
3. With enough time, I use just icons.
4. Why the ** do they keep moving it/changing the icons?
The model I have seen is that there's a cost for charging as well as parking after charging has completed. You get 20 minutes after charging has ended for free but there will be a blocking fee afterwards as long as the cable is still connected to the car and will be charged as part of the charging fee. If someone charges their car and then disconnects the cable and blocks the spot, they will be towed as the spot has a notice that it's only for charging devices.
I have seen those attached to light posts here in Germany but they all are in front of public area, not private houses so I guess it's only for charging, not parking.
In another point, if it's in front of a private property and the owner plan to occupy it for themselves, it would not make sense to install charger there as even when the owner is not charging, no one else can use.
I understand the post is about learning to speed up SHA1 calculation, that I have no comment. However, the state file is a solved problem for me. It's a rare case where state files are corrupted and it's simple to just re-check the file. I cannot imagine a torrent client checking the hash of TBs of files for every single start. It's not a coincidence that many torrent clients have a feature to skip hash checking and just immediately assume the file is correct and start seeding immediately.
reply