It's not a bug if someone designed it to work that way though - a no-op allocator is an allocator too, and can also be used on short-running processes (even outside of things that go boom).
I don't think there's any issue with asking when no explanation is provided and it's unclear to you. Whereas complaining about it is just tedious and doesn't add anything of value.
That movie was really incredible, right up until the part where they ran out of money making it and it took a right hand turn into being absolutely terrible.
When I was young I only saw the first half. Decades later I got to finish it ... what a letdown after all this time.
It feels like day 2 after you’ve received the new hard drives. It’s nice, modern enough but still a pretty bog standard home machine, not really “homelab” territory yet.
Why do you need to dilute the term? There is nothing wrong with your NAS running 3 apps that you press update once a year not being called "homelab" but just "a NAS"
Nobody is diluting anything. This person posted the setup they have in their home. It’s their homelab.
It’s not diluting any terms for them to call it that. Their setup is just as much a homelab as somebody else’s 48U rack.
It’s just a dick move, and against the rules of the site, to see somebody’s earnest post about their tech setup and post a shallow dismissal about how their setup isn’t deserving of your imagined barrier to entry.
Quit whining, you know damn well the bar for a typical "Show HN" has been raised to the point of being irrelevant these days, this post is a perfect example. This is not a home lab.
I'm happy for the OP and that it works for him. That said:
The equivalent of Joe Bloggs installing Linux onto an old laptop is neither curious nor interesting, let's not pretend it is because feelings.
This isn't a Show HN, and also I think you mean "lowered" given the tone of your post.
It's also been on the front page for most of the day on its own merits. It's clear you don't like the article. The guidelines are clear that you're expected to either engage constructively or just move along.
Exactly. And I don't mind this being on the HN front page, but I'd like to see some proper Homelab setups here. Maybe someone can post the coolest setup they've seen so far?
It’s harder when the person doing what you describe has the ability to have you fired. Power asymmetry + irresponsible AI use + no accountability = a recipe for a code base going right to hell in a few months.
I think we’re going to see a lot of the systems we depend on fail a lot more often. You’d often see an ATM or flight staus screen have a BSOD - I think we’re going to see that kind of thing everywhere soon.
“yet I don't have to know or care about implementation details”
Implementation details can very much matter though. I see this attitude from my managers that now submit huge PRs, and it is becoming a big problem.
I definitely agree that these tools allow one with an in-depth developer background to cover territory that was too much work previously. But plop me into a Haskell codebase, and I guarantee I’d cause all kinds of problems even with the best intentions and newest models. But the ramp up for learning these things has collapsed dramatically, and that’s very cool.
I still don’t want to have to learn all the pitfalls of those frameworks though. Hopefully we will converge on a smaller number, even if it’s on tooling that isn’t my favourite.
Conflicts are the least of our worries, and yes llms can handle that well. I’m taking about the things you can’t easily handle, the complexity that slowly overwhelms a codebase with no easy way out except a rewrite.
And a rewrite of a non-trivial application, even with the AI goodness, is still a big proposition and full of all kinds of risk. If you have a trivial application, you probably don’t have much protecting you from someone else vibing up a competing replacement either.
reply