Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | tslocum's comments login

Problems like this show why publishing outside of Google Play is necessary. I wrote about why I think F-Droid is the best alternative app store to use.

https://rocket9labs.com/post/on-the-importance-of-f-droid/


what does it matter if F-Droid has 0.001% of the reach and audience of Google Play Store

Chicken and egg. People need to also host on F-Droid to pull more users to F-Droid. Eventually if enough momentum is built towards F-Droid, dropping Google Play wouldn't be too much of an issue. Granted this is a really long longshot, but Google Play could use some serious competition amd the more apps that host on multple app stores, the more likely that is to happen.

  Location: Seattle, WA
  Remote: Yes (6 years of WFH experience)
  Willing to relocate: No
  Technologies: Go (Golang for Ctrl+F), Java, PHP, Python, JavaScript, HTML, CSS, PostgreSQL, MySQL, Linux sysadmin, Docker, Docker Compose
  Résumé/CV: Full résumé available upon request
  Email: tslocum@gmail.com
Professional software engineer for ten years, hobbyist programmer for many more. Active and passionate open source software author and contributor. Fully self-taught, and always excited to learn more. Seeking a fully remote position.

  Portfolios:
    - Code: https://code.rocket9labs.com/tslocum
    - GitHub: https://github.com/tslocum
    - Games: https://rocketnine.itch.io (All open source and written in Go)

I use matterbridge to do that. It works well.

https://github.com/42wim/matterbridge


Oof. I can understand why Valve wants to push this forward. But bypassing the existing protocol development just doesn't seem right.

Has Valve made every effort to assist in moving the official protocol forward before resorting to this? Reading the MR comments, the concensus seems to be that any remaining delay in publishing an official protocol is just a lack of maintainer/contributor activity. Seems like a perfect place for Valve to invest some man-hours and get it over the finish line.


The author goes into more detail here: (you have to scroll down because Mastodon doesn't implement permalinks properly) https://idtech.space/notice/AmKoRh9UNybVIC7eaW.

> the [wayland-protocols] governance model is totally broken, and needs to be just removed and should be replaced with controlled anarchy like Mesa.

> the fact that the repository is anything more than a collection of XML files that compositors and clients handshake on is a huge mistake. w-p should not be set up like a standards body. it doesn't deal with ip or legal frameworks like Khronos does; and the current w-p governance represents but a tiny selection of clients and compositors.

> whenever something new is proposed, the immediate reaction is typically "this goes against my ideology for what i think is pure and right for Wayland," which is totally messed up and not conducive to actually fixing any problems. take the window icons protocol, 95% of that whole thing was just utterly useless noise and what-about-ism.

> it is not just a "technical" problem, the way people treat others with differing opinions and schools of thought about how something should or could be done is really bad, and even if certain people are not directly members, they are associated/affiliated to projects who are, and act incredibly hostile.

> in my experience, wayland-protocols is just a lot of power-tripping and useless arguing, and not much actually solving problems.

> as mentioned by me and others, the bar for entry for a protocol to land even in 'staging' is ludicrously high, which leads to features taking literally half a decade to land at some times.

> having a path for experimental protocols in w-p -- ie. something that can be rapidly iterated on and implemented by clients and compositors, and shipped to users is a total must.

> experimental protocols can follow the basic iteration groundrules of what I defined in frog-protocols to avoid there being an immense amount of churn there.

> but I think all of this is incompatible with the current governance model.


More HN-esque:

  ssh playnetris.com
https://playnetris.com


It says it's waiting for 2 players to join. I don't understand why is it a collaborative game?


The version I linked supports both single player and online (competitive) multiplayer. The 'Practice' option allows playing single player.


  Location: Seattle, WA
  Remote: Yes (6 years of WFH experience)
  Willing to relocate: No
  Technologies: Go (Golang for Ctrl+F), Java, PHP, Python, JavaScript, HTML, CSS, PostgreSQL, MySQL, Linux sysadmin, Docker, Docker Compose
  Résumé/CV: Full résumé available upon request
  Email: tslocum@gmail.com
Professional software engineer for ten years, hobbyist programmer for many more. Active and passionate open source software author and contributor. Fully self-taught, and always excited to learn more. Seeking a fully remote position.

  Portfolios:
    - Code: https://code.rocket9labs.com/tslocum
    - GitHub: https://github.com/tslocum
    - Games: https://rocketnine.itch.io (All open source and written in Go)


I have been using this for a while to reduce the size of boxcars[0]. While the web UI is awesome, I recommend the TUI mode instead (gsa --tui <binary>), as I find it much easier to use and understand.

0. https://code.rocket9labs.com/tslocum/boxcars


Open source online backgammon. Backgammon is fairly niche, so there seems to be a lot of opportunity for backgammon software to be developed. I'm taking inspiration from Lichess, having enjoyed playing chess there for years. Check out the server, client and backgammon AI I'm working on at https://bgammon.org

(Source code at https://bgammon.org/code)


Interested in this.


It's not hard to guess where this is heading. Unless you are wealthy enough, you will eventually be priced out of owning domains with certain TLDs. We need domains for the internet to function, and we all want domains to remain predictably priced. So let's nationalize the .com and .net TLDs and loosen Verisign's grip. Combining that with price controls would provide a secure alternative to trusting privately owned TLDs.


On positive side, cyber squatters will be priced out from holding millions of domains.


Generating likenesses of people without their consent, dead or alive, is immoral. Considering Alan isn't here today to provide consent, we must assume his answer would be "no."


By that standard, monuments and memorials are unethical as well.


Monuments are there to remember someone, ai is there to force the idea that the person is still there. Its awkward


It goes without saying that the dead are unable to consent to any and all posthumous representations of themselves. If it is unethical to represent the dead without explicit consent, the specific form and purpose of such a representation is irrelevant to the ethical conclusion one reaches. An AI would only be as much of an ethical violation as a monument. No more and no less.


Since that immoral group would include many if not most of the best painters, sculptors, and playwrights, can we assume you forgot the '/s'?


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

Search: