Before AI people would still say things like this. "The best time to plant a tree is 10 years ago. The second best time is now". Among the set of such constructs, some are overused by LLM and have become a symbolic of it, but they will still show up in human writing with the same frequency as before.
I have 15k learned. It's a question of timing. Can time spent making the card outweigh time saved learning it? I would say yes. It's easy to spend too long making a single card. A compromise is to make a small card at first and improve it whenever you fail it.
Personally I need some context in a card to hook it up to other things. Such as the sentence where I first encountered it. Without that I will often fail the card over and over and waste time - it would have been quicker to put some effort upfront making a decent card.
I mean I can't give you my company code but my GitHub is not difficult to find. That said, I'm a little confused by your offer, because I feel like this doomed to fail because you don't have my context as to what I want improved?
In Japan they are also pushing an app for vending machines, but you immediately get three free drinks (then nothing after). It got me to sign up anyway.
The concepts the subtitle's spoke of related to the video displayed on-screen, and aligned with the timings of said video in a coherent way. The subtitles accented the visual information I was receiving, and vice-versa, in an accentual role.
I enjoyed the content of the video using the subtitles as delivered. It made sense and was informative. I doubt there were any egregious issues given the relative similarity of the two languages.
So if someone says "I do know German and the translations were all wrong", parent should feel free to say "Actually, I just meant the English grammar of the subtitles, not the accuracy of the subtitles itself" and you'd be just fine with that?
New phone came with no standalone music player only YouTube Music. But fair play to them you can click "local files only" at first launch and it keeps out of your way.
I bought a new Motorola phone and there are no less than three ways to open Google assistant (side button, hold home button, swipe from corner). Took me about 10 seconds before I triggered it unintentionally and quickly figured out how to disable all of them...
You live in a bubble. 299 is a crazy amount of money for me. I am currently debating whether to pay for copilot at 20/mo or keep using the free version.
Even if I was paying for that, there's no comparison between AI and a web framework that has many free competitors.
You don't need to pay for datastar. As I've said befor I don't use any of the pro plugins (plugins anyone can build themselves for that matter).
Sad to see developers getting ripped off by AI. Copilot is junk. The whole AI bubble is just a tax powered by fear of missing out. Save yourself 20$ a month, learn to touch type, use snippets and download a local copy of the docs.
Just because something is overhyped doesn't mean it can't be useful. You can literally try it for free with vscode and figure out quickly where it saves you time and where it doesn't. I made a value judgement that it saves me more than 20usd of time. If it didn't I wouldn't pay for it. Developers are not idiots motivated by fomo.
Using it for vibe coding where you pay for every token - and end up paying hundreds over dozens of iterations, when it would have been easier to write it yourself - is probably closer to what you're talking about. That's a totally different use case.
If you're using vscode your going to experience one of the biggest rug pulls in history (even more so if you're using copilot). I mean wasn't copilot free until recently?
Developers are idiots (I include myself in that). The industry is myopic and completely driven by fashion.
Because most of vscode is not open source. See the python lsp, copitlot, plugin store, the fact that it's practically impossible to turn off telemetry/tracking. Gradually more and more of the actual value, is being moved into these proprietary systems and plugins to the point where vscode is really just an open source shim. In fact the vscode binary running on your machine does not have an MIT licence.
For now that's fine as it's mainly an on-ramp for Azure. But, if Windows is anything to go by, I imagine the enshitification of vscode is inevitable given enough time.
What a world we're living in - I point out that a hostile comment is hostile, and I'm labeled hostile.
Once again, they aren't charging anything. Pay them if you want some largely-unnecessary features, or if you just want to support years of hard work and innovation. That's what I did.
If you're amenable to feedback, the impression I got from your initial comment was "a hostile comment pointing out another hostile comment". It assumed a negative motivation on OOP based on vibes and you ran with it. Even this comment's parting line:
> But you do you.
- seems like a truism. I get the feeling it's meant to be read as "I give up. You can keep whatever wrong viewpoint you have".
I concede that my original comment here was somewhat hostile, but only really the first line. And it wasn't even all that hostile - especially when the rest of the comment was really just informative and positive about datastar.
And, moreover, is standing up to poor behaviour - even if done in a somewhat hostile/confrontational way - really such a bad thing? It seems quite clear to me that they were not communicating in good faith - they didnt come to discuss features, philosophy about open source sustainability, or actual reality of the messaging on the site and their discord server.
Instead THEY are explicitly saying that Datastar's devs are being dishonest in some way for having a pro license (which, again, they quite clearly say most people should not buy) as a way to bring a modicum of sustainability to something that theyve dedicated years to and given 99% of the value away for free.
They could have said "This looks interesting, but I noticed that there's a pro license if you want to get some features. Are these features necessary? Is this price reasonable? Should we be against there being a 501c3 behind this? etc..."
But they did none of that. I think that all that a reasonable person can really conclude is that they're either the disdainful sort of person who thinks all code should be free for everyone, or that they are just trolling, or perhaps even that they dont like how datastar is challenging the status quo of webdev.
Hence, "you do you" - you interpreted it exactly as I intended.
I'm sorry people didn't immediately take to this financing model as well as you did. The average person is not as invested as you and most people are going to immediately switch off if they hear part of the functionality costs money and this isn't mentioned anywhere on the front page. Doesn't matter how "unnecessary" these features are, it's a bad look.
Plenty of other open source projects make money without attracting this kind of negative feedback. It's curious to me that you suggest everyone is intentionally being negative or malicious here, instead of looking at why the project caused such a response.
People pay for things all the time, why not (almost surely unnecessary) code? Why do you all feel entitled to free access to thousands of hours of very highly skilled devs' efforts (most of which they actually are giving away for free)?
Moreover, it is quite common for there to be pro versions of libraries these days - tailwind, all sorts of component libraries, etc..
> Plenty of other open source projects make money without attracting this kind of negative feedback
We dont seem to be living in the same reality. In mine, maintaining open source projects is a nearly-completely thankless, profit-less endeavour. It is a rare exception that someone can earn a living from it. And datastar's devs have zero expectation that they'll do so, even with this model - hence it is registered as a 501c3, and the funds will cover things like travelling to conferences to talk about it.
I think the pro version and charging stuff is totally fine. It's the lack of transparency that bothers people. I shouldn't have to figure out their profit model from HN comments. If you want to be paid for your work, charge for the whole library or make the free/pro distinction very clear to people. Don't try to hook them in with a free offering while locking features behind a paywall that they discover later.
Or if you want to be altruistic (as you keep referring to nonprofit) make it free and solicit donations/patreon.
The current approach is certainly a new one and I am interested to see if it pays off.
