I think it is uncharitable to assert that a company that is 45 years old has a strategy that is "never-changing". There is no denying that Microsoft has been hostile to Linux and open source efforts before, but it doesn't mean that this would never change. Last I checked, Microsoft was the largest contributor to open source projects, and Satya Nadella seems to embrace FOSS
I don't see what they've done to earn your trust. You just want to believe theyre different, just like the parent wants to believe theyre not. The truth is probably in the middle.
Looks like this search engine searches the _articles_ and links that have been shared, whereas hn.algolia.com only searches title, author, and the text of a post if it is a text post.
Certainly not, but considering there should be 100M available by the end of the year, it seems like they are scaling up the production line considerably
> Bari is bad, only wants speech she likes to matter.
I am not at all familiar with the author of the letter, but could you elaborate on this? I didn't get that impression reading the letter, or what I assume is quotes from the author in your comment.
When it comes to moderation of a YC startup on HN, "The first rule of HN moderation is to moderate less, not more" says dang on previous threads concerning YC startups and he has expressed the same sentiment here in this thread
You mention cognitive load, however this post[0] about Go made me think that the "simplicity" of Go might come with it's own issues that lead to more cognitive load in the long run
If you view the historical uptime, it does seem like there have been more incidents in the past three months, but otherwise the waters look calm (as reported at least): https://www.githubstatus.com/uptime?page=1
Yes, and so this is actually a thing that bugs me, because I use Github every day. Over the past several months, there have been numerous days in which I've had problems (`You can not comment at this time`, 500s, etc.) and no corresponding status report.
It seems like the historical uptime page paints a far rosier picture than I am actually experiencing.
I wonder how companies like github decide to determine this when outages are geospecific. Do they not report until an outage is affecting 50% of a geographic region before its reported as a partial outage?
If you do nothing, it lands by default on the "git operations" view, which is by far the most stable, since, well, it consists of executing the battle-tested git program.
If you want to see more the state of github "extras", you'd need to select "github actions" or "webhooks", which have a fair amount of downtime (about once a week or so, which seems about right).
Interesting how the most stable component of the company is the open source one of course ^^
GitHub hasn't collapsed killing thousands or needing to be completely rebuilt though, so that analogy doesn't work. This is more like there's a flood in the lobby so maintenance has closed the front door for a bit.
I didn't mean for the point to be about the consequences of the failure. What I was trying to argue against was the notion that it's fine for things to fail, just by virtue of them being hard. There are a lot of complicated systems in the world that work extremely reliably.
It's not a good thing that Github is down. It's an inevitable thing that comes from complexity at scale though. Hard things are hard, whether that's planes, buildings, or web apps.
[0]: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html