It's not been the case for probably more than 20 years, but I remember that in the past the official website of the Italian Postal Service [1] used to be closed out of office hours.
Japanese websites still do this. If you buy shinkansen tickets between 23:00-05:00 you get:
* JR central - you can buy, but not reserve seats, as the system actually registers your ticket at 5am
* Jr east - you cannot buy.
Some banks/government sites also simply don't want to work at night.
Very frustrating. To me it spells incompetence, but maybe there's some non-technical stakeholder who made a stupid rule once. For JR its probably some nightly accounting system - not 100% sure but I assume all the modern systems are just plugged on top of the ancient ones just like the airline industry does it.
> scaling problems due to the influx of LLM assisted coding
You mean people pushing LLM assisted coding, or github's own coders pushing LLM assisted code to production ? :-).
I am more inclined to think that it is the second, but if the reason is the first, what is particular hard to scale ? It's not like everybody is vide-coding into a single repository, so I would expect that most of the load would naturally be scalable by increasing the resources. If for some reason that is not possible, I would expect a corporation as big as Github to keep the paying customers working by gracefully denying service to the free tier, not to collapse like an house of cards.
Last year I started self hosting my email. I found that once you setup the “usual suspects” (DMARC, DKIM, SPF…) outgoing mail works without issues. In fact it works now better than the (small) provider I was using before.
And setting them up properly is not even that difficult nowadays
Whenever HN discusses self-hosting email, half the people with self-hosting experience say they never had any issues and the other half says they had so many issues they had to give it up.
I self-hosted for years and I did all the standard things you're supposed to do, but I had tremendous problems with Gmail and Outlook. Other providers usually went through without issue.
I guess there is a certain amount of luck in this, probably related to the provider, or the range that your IP reside into. (I guess google and microsoft keep their own blacklists, regardless of what public blacklists say). I wonder if the best course of action in that case is to just spin up a new server on a different provider and try again.
FWIW, in my case, I am running the server on Hetzner, even though is supposed to have a bad reputation, but I have been using its IP for more than 10 years for other things (web server, personal services etc) so I guess that helps
Hard to tell. My server's IP was not on any public blacklists (confirmed by https://multirbl.valli.org/) and it was whitelisted on DNSWL.org at medium trust level.
Not all non-trivial workloads are web-scale. There are plenty of on-premise applications out there that have at most hundreds or thousands of concurrent users, and the connections come from a bunch of fat spring boot servers that handle most of the pooling by themselves.
This is all quantifiable. I regularly have my model run benchmarks against all the config permutations and then choose the best based on my criteria, which typically boil down to trading prefill and decode times
I'm running on Strix Halo so memory bandwidth is my constraint. In that example I'm describing the choice between using ROCm or Vulkan. I have a llama-swap config that can call different instances of llama-server running a toolbox with either runtime.
Memory bandwidth is my constraint too (M4 Max) but prefill and single-token decode don't run at the same time. It's best to use batched prefill so you can benefit from processing multiple tokens with a single pass through the model weights.
the slogan came out when the alternative was Perl, and in Perl you could do the same thing in a million ways, and each of them was equally "idiomatic".
> There should be one-- and preferably only one --obvious way to do it. [1]
Note the `should` and the `obvious`. Is it not a strict rule about having a single way to do things. It is about the aspiration that, if you do something, there is single obvious way to do it, much better than the others.
(I agree though that not even this is true anymore, see how many different ways you have to interpolate strings).
That is also the approach that Nintendo took with Super Mario Bros, as in the first level you almost cannot avoid to learn that, for example mushrooms=good and goomba=bad [1]
> It globs your filesystem and re-reads AGENTS.md (injected in turn-0 system prompt) on every SSE turn. If you put a quick note in AGENTS.md to be read in the next session, you immediately force a full re-evaluation.
> Personal favourite: it puts the current date in the turn-0 system prompt and re-evaluates every SSE turn. If you’re using OpenCode at midnight you get a full prompt cache miss.
I used opencode with deepseek v4 via openrouter during the weekend. Openrouter claims a cache hit rate of about 95%. Maybe it can be improved, but it doesn't seem broken.
I agree that it is bloated, and uses a lot of memory and cpu. But I don't remember seeing any bug during its usage, or at least not big enough to notice
> So if that were the case then why isn't there some sore of daemon or system software service that tracks the expected life of the hardware?
Some linux distribution will regularly check SMART data from disk and warn you if some threshold has passed (like number of corrected errors, spin up/down, total hours etc).
That said, if we talk about consumer hardware in a home lab or the like, of the disks that I bought in the past 15 years, only one broke down, and it did fairly quickly so my suggestion is to use redundant storage, make backup and change the disk when it breaks down. (Enterprise disk and usage is another can of worms of course).
UI wise git sucks. The its commands are barely related to what they do, and that little makes sense only if you have in mind the underlying storage model (which is by itself a sign of bad UI).
Almost any other version control tool I have used in my life make more sense that git.
There are many reason for why git won, being able to use it without having to look up commands is not one of them.
The commands don't require you to know the underlying storage model. e.g. I have maybe once in 15 years had an occasion to think about packfiles. I couldn't tell you basic facts about the storage like whether a git clone will mean you necessarily have the same object files as the upstream (I presume no). Content addressed (with named references) snapshots aren't the underlying storage model. They are the UI model, and they make a ton of sense for that purpose.
https://poste.it
reply