Open Source isn't going anywhere. Open Contribution might be on the way out. I built an open source command line tool (https://github.com/dtnewman/zev) that went very minorly viral for a few days last year.
What I found in the following week is a pattern of:
1) People reaching out with feature requests (useful)
2) People submitting minor patches that take up a few lines of code (useful)
3) People submitting larger PRs, that were mostly garbage
#1 above isn't going anywhere. #2 is helpful, especially since these are easy to check over. For #3, MOST of what people submitted wasn't AI slop per se, but just wasn't well thought out, or of poor quality. Or a feature that I just didn't want in the product. In most cases, I'd rather have a #1 and just implement it myself in the way that I want to code organized, rather than someone submitting a PR with poorly written code. What I found is that when I engaged with people in this group, I'd see them post on LinkedIn or X the next day bragging about how they contributed to a cool new open-source project. For me, the maintainer, it was just annoying, and I wasn't putting this project out there to gain the opportunity to mentor junior devs.
In general, I like the SQLite philosophy of we are open source, not open contribution. They are very explicit about this, but it's important for anyone putting out an open source project that you have ZERO obligation to accept any code or feature requests. None.
This comment really hit me - I have a few things I've worked on but never released, and I didn't even realize it was basically because I don't want to deal with all of that extra stuff. Maybe I'll release them with this philosophy.
Presumably the issue here is that you have customers with >10k records, but can't show them. Why not take their data and anonymize it, then put it under a fake customer?
> "what does error handling look like with real load?"*
I find it hard to believe that anyone is making an investment decision off of this question, but how would you demo this with a real customer anyway? Intentionally introduce a bug so that you can show them how errors are handled? Wouldn't the best course of action here be to just describe the error handling?
Indeed, I think the only "new" thing about clawdbot is that it is using discord/telegram/etc as the interface? Which isn't really new, but seems to be what people really like
I think a big part of it is timing. Claude Opus 4.5 is really good at running agentic loops, and Clawdbot happened to be the easiest thing to install on your own machine to experience that in a semi-convenient interface.
> The current landscape is a battle between loss-leaders. OpenAI is burning through billions of dollars per year and is expected to hit tens of billions in losses per year soon. Your $20 per month subscription to ChatGPT is nowhere near keeping them afloat. Anthropic’s figures are more moderate, but it is still currently lighting money on fire in order to compete and gain or protect market share.
I don't doubt that the leading labs are lighting money on fire. Undoubtedly, it costs crazy amounts of cash to train these models. But hardware development takes time and it's only been a few years at this point. Even TODAY, one can run Kimi K2.5, a 1T param open-source model on two mac studios. It runs at 24 tokens/sec. Yes, it'll cost you $20k for the specs needed, but that's hobbyist and small business territory... we're not talking mainframe computer costs here. And certainly this price will come down? And it's hard to imagine that the hardware won't get faster/better?
Yes... training the models can really only be done with NVIDIA and costs insane amounts of money. But it seems like even if we see just moderate improvement going forward, this is still a monumental shift for coding if you compare where we are at to 2022 (or even 2024).
And just to add to this the reason the Apple macs are used is that they have the highest memory bandwidth of any easily obtainable consumer device right now. (Yes the nvidia cards which also have hbm are even higher on memory bandwidth but not easily obtainable). Memory bandwidth is the limiting factor for inference more so than raw compute.
Memory costs are skyrocketing right now as everyone pivots to using hbm paired with moderate processing power. This is the perfect combination for inference. The current memory situation is obviously temporary. Factories will be built and scaled and memory is not particularly power hungry, there’s a reason you don’t really need much cooling for it. As training becomes less of a focus and inference more of a focus we will at some point be moving from the highest end nvidia cards to boxes of essentially power efficient memory hbm memory attached to smaller more efficient compute in the future.
I see a lot of commentary “ai companies are so stupid buying up all the memory” around the place atm. That memory is what’s needed to run the inference cheaply. It’s currently done on nvidia cards and apple m series cpus because those two are the first to utilise High Bandwidth Memory but the raw compute of the nvidia cards is really only useful for training, they are just using them for inference right now because there’s not much pn the market that has similar memory bandwidth. But this will be changing very soon. Everyone in the industry is coming along with their own dedicated compute using hbm memory.
General rule... you have zero obligation to merge any code to your repo, much less bad code, or very large hard-to-review submissions.
I think that it's bad manners for someone to submit a big PR without prior experience with the project. Someone needs to earn trust over time. They might start out with a few small PRs and gradually build up to the point where you might trust them with a larger change. But even so, a 4k-line PR is very unreasonable.
I think what this misses is that insurers handle the hassle of dealing with negotiated rates.
As an example, if you go to the ER and get a strep test, you might be billed $500, and insurance will pay $7 (as ridiculous as this sounds). If you go at this on your own, they'll probably bill you $100 and tell you they are giving you an 80% discount. With lots of phone calls, you can maybe get them down to $50.
This is all obviously crazy. But it makes it such that you really do want insurance if you can afford it. More so, even if you are a billionaire and can afford to self insure, it still makes sense to have health insurance (whereas property or life insurance probably don't make sense for you).
Also, don't forget that insurance premiums are often tax deductible for wealthy people, so the actual amount paid is less.
Dental insurance is even worse. My dental insurance has ridiculously low limits, but it gets you access to the "real" negotiated rates rather than whatever silliness "retail price" is.
I tried going without when I switched jobs to an employer that doesn't offer it, but one cleaning as a "cash payer" cost more than the annual premiums to buy insurance privately.
Executive order 14221 (passed in 2021, [0]) was supposed to provide transparency about what the actual negotiated rates were. The idea was that it would be a lot harder for hospitals to engage in price discrimination when they had to publish what everyone was paying.
The actual effect has been... mixed. IIUC, the hospitals mostly haven't complied with the order, or they're maliciously complying while trying to keep their real rates secret.
> I almost always book the minimum flight, basic economy, whether or not I am paying. There is so little to be gained from moving up compared to the price.
I recently had a five month period where I took a plane ride every single week for work. A “frequent traveler” so to speak.
To me, the big difference between basic economy and regular is the ability to cancel (for a credit) up until the flight takes off. When you travel once in a while, this isn’t worth that much. When you travel every week, it’s huge. For example, when I travel (round trip) 3-5 times a year (which is my normal cadence), I’m not gonna really care if I booked an 8pm flight but last minute decided that I have time to get on a 6pm. An extra two hours not-at-home is no big deal, maybe even a good thing. When you travel every week, the ability to change later minute is huge (and contrary to popular belief, I found that it is often the case that last minute flights are the same price or cheaper, depending on the route, though it can also be wildly more expensive).
In addition to changing my mind about when to leave, don’t get me started on delays. If I saw my flight was delayed two hours (which often means that it’ll end up cancelling or taking off 6 hours late), I’d immediately book an alternative (if I could find one at a decent price) and then cancel one of them right before departure.
Aside from this, seat selection is important, especially if you travel a lot (the lifestyle is hard enough to begin with). You can usually buy seats in basic economy and the whole thing will be cheaper, but assuming you are going to do that, then the difference is gonna be $25-30 which is basically the “right to cancel” fee.
Economists call this type of pricing strategy price discrimination. Basically you have a different marginal willingness to pay than others because of your frequency.
If you travel every week for work, I would be booking full fare (refundable), not non-basic restricted fares. Especially since if you are booking inside a week of departure the difference is not that great anyway.
>If you travel every week for work, I would be booking full fare (refundable), not non-basic restricted fares.
Why? I don’t fly that much, especially for work, and I’ve never had a problem getting to use my credits from cancelling flights. The price difference between credit-refundable and full refundable is usually significant and doesn’t offer me anything.
If the price difference is significant then sure. My experience booking 3-5 days ahead of time is there isn't much difference. In addition to no credits to keep track of, which don't seem to be your concern,
- simplifies expense filing
- if paying with a personal card (vs a corporate card), i'm not floating extra cash that is now converted to a credit
- full fare is less likely to get bumped on overbooking
If something is happening in my life where I can’t use my airline credit within a year, I’ve got bigger issues. Even then at least with Delta, you just have to book a flight using the credit before it expires - and the flight can be after the credit would have expired - wait 24 hours cancel the ticket and then receive a new credit that resets the timer.
Isn’t the biggest difference the ability to bring a carry-on suitcase? I’ve always found that immediately and categorically disqualifying for basic economy. There’s never been a situation where I could fly somewhere with just the clothes on my back.
Only the budget carriers like Frontier and Spirit charge extra for carry on. Even the second tier airlines like JetBlue and Southwest don’t charge for carry ons.
The issue is boarding priority and you may not have overhead space and still be forced to gate check your carry on (for free).
In the case of Delta, it’s a combination of not being able to choose your seat, no refunds or airline credit for canceling or changing your flight and no miles earned toward future flights.
Until 3 years ago, we flew out of ATL and only occasionally and only domestically. So our default choice was of course - just fly Delta.
After all of the stars aligned around mid 2021, we moved to Orlando and started flying more.
Our default choice is still to fly Delta domestically because of familiarity, status, lounge access and we don’t mind a layover in ATL since it is our former home, familiarity and lounge access - Delta has nine lounges in ATL.
If we really just want to get somewhere without layover. I will look on flights from -
And see what airline has a non stop flight. The only airline I refuse to fly domestically is Southwest because of non reserve seating until next year.
But it’s rare that we will choose an airline that’s not Delta.
Internationally, we prefer Delta or SkyTeam airlines like Virgin or AirFrance.
We don’t shop based on price, the only time we compare flights is for convenience, we don’t fly first class or anything. But we just don’t like the hassle of flying airlines besides Delta.
Of course if we lived in an AA or United hub, it would be different. So substitute Delta for airline where you have status and/or a cobranded credit card that gives you some minor convenience.
I encountered this for the first time this year. Bought the cheapest ticket, didn't think they'd exclude carry-on. Ended up having to WhatsApp (in Spanish) then to add it on for $250 round trip. Insane.
are flight delays common in the US?
ive been flying very regularly primarily around Asia for around a decade. (every 2 months or so) and ive never had a flight delayed more than hour (last minute at the gate always) anything longer.. i could only imagine it happening if there was a typhoon or something
Mechanical difficulties, weather esp. snow, air traffic control hold on incoming flights, etc. I wouldn't say >1 hr. delays were necessarily common but they're not rare either.
In my experience it depends on the route. I use SFO a lot and delays are quite common there because the they get a lot of fog and their runways are too close together for regulation to allow use of adjacent runways under bad visibility.
Look for startups that interest you and then email the founders. Follow up every two months until you hear a hard no. Things are absolute chaos at an early startup and it's rare that the job board (if even there at all) is up to date.
What I found in the following week is a pattern of:
1) People reaching out with feature requests (useful) 2) People submitting minor patches that take up a few lines of code (useful) 3) People submitting larger PRs, that were mostly garbage
#1 above isn't going anywhere. #2 is helpful, especially since these are easy to check over. For #3, MOST of what people submitted wasn't AI slop per se, but just wasn't well thought out, or of poor quality. Or a feature that I just didn't want in the product. In most cases, I'd rather have a #1 and just implement it myself in the way that I want to code organized, rather than someone submitting a PR with poorly written code. What I found is that when I engaged with people in this group, I'd see them post on LinkedIn or X the next day bragging about how they contributed to a cool new open-source project. For me, the maintainer, it was just annoying, and I wasn't putting this project out there to gain the opportunity to mentor junior devs.
In general, I like the SQLite philosophy of we are open source, not open contribution. They are very explicit about this, but it's important for anyone putting out an open source project that you have ZERO obligation to accept any code or feature requests. None.
reply