If the argument for NoSQL is, “we don’t know what our schema is going to be”, stop.

Stop and go ask more questions until you have a better understanding of the problem.

Oftentimes better understanding of the problem needs trying out solutions. Armchair architectures tend to blow up in contact with reality.

For sure, though with databases it's usually pretty clear even at the start whether your "objects" will be relational in nature. I can't think of a single time that hasn't been the case, over hundreds of apps/services I've been part of. Things like asynchronous jobs, message queues, even object storage, I fully agree though.

Even a JSON column would be better in most cases IMO, and on Postgres you can also make indexes on json keys.

This balanced perspective on what’s good for someone personally vs what’s good for society at large is what’s missing from the world.

Any reasonable landlord/real estate investor will have planned for various results - if your rental empire depends on "rents go up" and can't handle a flat market, let alone a downturn, you're going to be in for a bad time.

A stable market is great; as you can find good deals with some sort of certainty, and focus on where you can actually build value (rehab, etc).

If you are smart, you throttle up investments just before a boom starts and throttle them back just before a boom ends. At least you try to up your margins during good times so you can survive bad times. The trick is keeping your talent employed during the bad times so they are trained up and still in the industry for good times. Stability is obviously preferable.

Sure, but you can feel some emergent philosophies that are starting to converge and there are recognizable aesthetics.

*yet

Build the audience first, attack comes later

find is provided by the OS, not a terminal emulator like Ghostty. Most likely something is wrong with your paths.

I think they mean like CTRL+F kind of find.

This is addressed in paragraph 5 of the post they replied to.

The terminal was _always awesome_, the bar to realized that was just a tad high for many people. Until now!

here-doc usage has probably 100x-ed in the last year

It's 1,000,000,000,000x easy. Have found enough annoying bugs in powershells implementation of it that I know nobody is using it.

How so?

If you aren’t paying for the product, you are the product being sold. No, thank you.

This is a website full of programmers.

I expect an extension or Python script that ask it to generate 100 random complex questions and then proceeds to ask for answers until your limits on the free plan are reached on a loop

My impression is that this was never about the TOS. It was about breaking a contract with Anthropic by someone with an incentive to replace it with OpenAI.

I don’t have evidence, just using Occam’s razor.

The evidence point is Brockmans sizeable donation. You think that was for nothing... lol come on.

Claude’s answer, which is the only one that clicked for me:

Normally when you do something like command > file.txt, you’re only capturing the normal output — errors still go to your screen.

2>&1 is how you say: “send the error pipe into the same place as the normal output pipe.” Breaking it down without jargon: • 2 means “the error output” • > means “send it to” • &1 means “wherever the normal output is currently going” (the & just means “I’m referring to a pipe, not a file named 1”)

> Claude’s answer

This response is essentially just the second answer to the linked question (the response by dbr) with a bunch of the important words taken out.

And all it cost you to get it was more water and electricity than simply clicking the link and scrolling down — to say nothing of the other costs.

FWIW, I clicked the link, scanned the SO thread, then scanned the HN thread. The "bunch of important words taken out" is exactly the service I paid AI for.

"I didn't have time to write you a short letter, so I wrote you a long one." is real.

> • 2 means “the error output” • > means “send it to” • &1 means “wherever the normal output is currently going” (the & just means “I’m referring to a pipe, not a file named 1”)

If you want it with the correct terminology:

2 means "file descriptor 2", > means "assign the previous mentioned to the following", &2 means "file descriptor 1" (and not file named "1")