Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | jonathrg's commentslogin

The JSON types are string, number, boolean, null, object and array. So how could the suggested code possibly work? Do you want JSON.parse to do arbitrary code execution like Python's pickle?

Bitbucket is okay to use, the main problem like with every Atlassian product is that it is dog slow.

How do you know what you were downvoted for?

I guess he was told because otherwise you don't know whether you said something inherently wrong or misleading or you hurt someone 's feeling.

That's the richness behind the upvote/downvote that also tend to create echo chambers because you soon learn what causes downvotes.

I've personally noticed downvote whenever I mentioned apple negatively.


Having a type safe generic ring buffer and such is nice

You definitely need discipline to use C++ in embedded. There are exactly 2 features that come to mind, which makes it worth it for me: 1) replacing complex macros or duplicated code with simple templates, and 2) RAII for critical sections or other kinds of locks.

Consteval is great for generating lookup tables without external code generators. You can use floating point freely, cast the result to integers, and then not link any soft float code into the final binary.

I have no reason to trust that the fork itself is competently maintained when the author did not even bother to write the announcement.


I'm generally fully in agreement that AI writing is bad.

But this is one of the few cases where it might be acceptable.

Author is not a native speaker; in an announcement that a known project is being forked for maintenance the occasional odd phrasing and possible errors in grammar could sound unprofessional.

I wonder if in such cases a better use of AI would be to try to write it yourself and just ask a LLM to revise instead? Maybe with some directive to "just point out errors in syntax and grammar, and factual mistakes. No suggestions on style"?


The author is Chinese and not a native English speaker. I will happily give them a pass on using GenAI to "write the announcement".


They explain why in their AI policy. It's an ethical stance. Of course they wouldn't notice if there aren't clear signs of LLM-ness, but that's not the main reason why they forbid it.

https://docs.postmarketos.org/policies-and-processes/develop...


Thanks for the clarification. Not that I agree with their stance (the exact same could have been said at the start of the industrial revolution) but I respect it nonetheless.


> the exact same could have been said at the start of the industrial revolution

The pollution caused by said revolution is currently putting humanity at a serious risk of world war and maybe even extinction so... maybe they had a point? I'm not taking a strong stance either way here, but worth thinking about the downsides from the industrial revolution, too.


It's fine for a project to have moral/ideological leanings, it's only weird if you insist that project teams should be entirely amoral.


The main reason open source projects exist at all is because of people who started them with quite often fringe ideological leanings. Just look at the GNU project.


And fringe economical leanings, too. Just look at the GNU project: the firmware in printers is still of subpar quality, and GNU didn't really help to change that... and why on Earth would it, anyway?


[flagged]


This doesn’t make any sense?


> It's fine for a project to have moral/ideological leanings

As long as they align with the correct (i.e. yours) values, of course. When they adopt the wrong values, it's not fine.


But it is fine. If I disagree with a project's values I'm not going to contribute to it, and they wouldn't want me there either.


There's still a line between values I disagree with and values that directly attack me as a person. The former is how many of us feel about some of our dependencies and most proprietary software we use, so it's clearly fine to some degree.


Very happy to see PostmarketOS take an uncompromising stance and also providing justification for it.


Feels pretty Luddite to me.

I remember when people were crying about how much power a google search uses. This is the same thing all over again and it is as pointless now as it was back then.

https://arstechnica.com/ai/2025/08/google-says-it-dropped-th...

> Google says it dropped the energy cost of AI queries by 33x in one year. The company claims that a text query now burns the equivalent of 9 seconds of TV.


The audacity to call an organisation that works on making mobile phones and other small PCs work with free software Luddite is impressive.

That's like calling a person going for seconds a conservative (in the USA political sense).


[flagged]


I don't think you understand what the job entails, if you think these are the best tools


No, it's entirely justified when quality of code matters. They don't want a thousand gallons of unreviewable slop. They want a reasonable amount of code that can be sensibility reviewed.


There are ways to achieve that without a blanket ban, if you read their AI policy it seems more "ethically" motivated. They certainly address this first, with many more words and 7 references.

They do go on to address code quality but it is more of an after thought with 0 references, less words and appears lower down the page.

The timing is also suspicious, shortly after publication of this report: https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/smartphone-ma... which forecasts declining smartphone sales meaning less devices for this OS to run on.


> The timing is also suspicious, shortly after publication of this report: https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/smartphone-ma... which forecasts declining smartphone sales meaning less devices for this OS to run on.

Why would declining sales of new smartphones have anything to do with PostMarketOS, which only supports phones more than half a decade old?


PostmarketOS doesn't exist in a vacuum. It’s the final stage of a device's life cycle. If the initial sales of new devices decline, the pool of available hardware for enthusiasts to tinker with in five years will be significantly smaller.


Yes. In five years, once the PMOS devs manage to get a 2025 device in working state, they might have less devices to play around with, so there could be an indirect effect on the project.

What I struggle to believe - what I don't believe - is that there any sort of connection between the report about likely declining sales and PMOS' announcement.


pmOS does support recent phones, provided that they can be bootloader-unlocked - and that's only a few brands these days.


Right now, their wiki page on device support [0] lists zero actual devices as "fully supported":

> These are the most supported devices, maintained by at least 2 people and have the functions you expect from the device running its normal OS, such as calling on a phone, working audio, and a functional UI.

> Besides QEMU devices, this is currently empty. The ports we had here earlier weren't as reliable as we would have liked. We plan to add new devices here with a higher standard.

The most recent smartphone in the Community section of that page is the Fairphone 4, released half a decade ago, in 2021. Pixel devices can trivially be bootloader unlocked, but that doesn't make the work that goes into supporting them much easier: the latest device in Testing is the 6a/6 Pro, from 2022, and its device page lists all the features but the most basic (touchscreen, flash, internal storage) as "Untested".

[0] https://wiki.postmarketos.org/wiki/Devices


[flagged]


This is incredibly simple. If a project doesn't want machine generated code, don't force machine generated code into the project. This isn't anything here that warrants multiple paragraphs of freakout.


Agreed. I would have chosen differently, but I appreciate the policy is unambiguous and explained succinctly with references.

Some people enjoy the outcome, others enjoy the process.

I find the criticism interesting. It's like one restaurant saying they'll use only electric stoves for the climate, then chefs all over the world calling them stupid naive for it.

It's like ethical arguments rationalizing local behavior are automatically interpreted as a global attack that has to be rejected.


I wish more projects would take the same stance.


You say "uncompromising stance" with "justification", I say stubborn prejudice. They simply state the same weak, nonsensical complaints that apply to many other technologies that they undoubtedly don't have issues with and are happy with the use of.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: