Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Astral to Join OpenAI

astral.sh

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

461–470 of 951 posts

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#461

Post by crimsoneer »

tomrod wrote: post #425
shawnwall wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

been in the python game a long time and i've seen so many tools in this space come and go over the years. i still rely on good ol pip and have had no issues. that said, we utilize mypy and ruff, and have moved to pyproject etc to remotely keep up with the times.

Geospatial tends to be the Achilles heel for python projects for me. Fiona is a wiley beast of a package, and GDAL too. Conda helped some but was always so slow. Pip almost uniformly fails in this area for me.

Yup, the fact UV just installed geopandas out of the box with no issues blew my mind.

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#463

Post by tomnipotent »

xorcist wrote: post #370
petcat wrote: post #224

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The biggest scam the mega-clouds and the Githubs ever pulled was convincing open source developers that the GPL was somehow out of vogue and BSD/MIT/Apache was better. All so they could just vacuum it all up and resell it with impunity.

The big cloud providers are perfectly happy to use GPL'd stuff (see: Elastic, MySQL). They don't need to use embrace-and-extend, they're content with hosting. The ones pushing for permissive licenses are rather companies like Apple, Android (and to some extent other parts of Google), Microsoft, Oracle. They want to push their proprietary stuff and one way to do that in the face of open source competition is by propri…

> ones pushing for permissive licenses are rather companies like Apple, Android

The FOSS community at large embraced permissive licenses and it had nothing to do with the interests of big corporations.

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#464

Post by mcdonje »

kjksf wrote: post #293
mcdonje wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you not aware of foundations?

The issue is lack of money not lack of legal structure. Consider ffmpeg. You can donate via https://www.ffmpeg.org/spi.html How much money do they make from donations? I don't know but "In practice we frequently payed for travel and hardware." Translation: nothing at all. If such a fundamental project that is a revenue driver for so many companies, including midas-level rich companies like Google, can't even pay dece…

Google contributed tons of developer hours for things like bug fixes, without which the project might not be where it is today.

There are examples of foundations or other similar entities paying developers, like Linux, SQLite, even Zig.

Maybe the difference is some projects rely on core contributors more because external contributions are more restricted in some way.

But sure, the entire open source model doesn't work, lol

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#465

Post by skydhash »

everforward wrote: post #334
skydhash wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Writing a parser is not that much of work to buy a company in order to do it. Piggybacking on LSP servers and treesitter would be more efficient.

Writing a literal parser isn’t too hard (and there’s presumably an existing one in the source code for the language). Writing something that understands all the methods that come in a Django model goes way beyond parsing the code, and is a genuine struggle in language where you can’t execute the code without worrying about side effects like Python. Ty should give them a base for that where the model is able to see th…

If you’re talking about magic methods/properties enabled by reflection and macros, then you’re no longer statically analyzing the code.

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#467

Post by chuckadams »

roryirvine wrote: post #455
leetrout wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember a somewhat prominent dev in the DC area putting on Twitter around 2012 or so something like "I do plenty of open source coding and I don't put a fucking license on it" and it stuck with me for all these years that it was a weird stance to take.

Dan Bernstein took that attitude back in the 90s - I think his personal theory of copyright went something like "if it doesn't have a license, then it's obviously public domain", which ran counter to the mainstream position of "if it doesn't have a license, then you have to treat it as proprietary". And, sure, djb wasn't actually likely to sue you if you went ahead and distributed modified versions of his software...…

I doubt the lack of license was the reason DJB's projects didn't take over the world. Most of them required heavy forking to break away from hardwired assumptions about the filesystem and play nice with the OS distribution, and DJB is himself notoriously difficult to work with. Still, qmail managed to establish maildir as the standard format and kill off mbox, and for that alone I'm eternally grateful.

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#469

Post by dcre »

throwaway5752 wrote: post #411
dcre wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't blame you for not trusting OpenAI, but it seems to me they would gain very little from fucking up uv (or more precisely doing things that have a side effect of fucking up uv), and they have tons of incentive to cultivate developer good will. Better to think of buying and supporting a project like this as a very cheap way to make developers think they're not so bad.

No they don't have incentive to cultivate developer goodwill. They are monetizing replacing developers everywhere. That is the trillion-dollar valuation. They have the opposite incentive.

They are not. A very large proportion of their revenue comes from developers. A large proportion of their marketing and product work is aimed at developers. You have to work really hard to not see this. Just look at what Altman and Brockman tweet about.

https://xcancel.com/gdb

https://xcancel.com/sama/

Re: Astral to Join OpenAI

#470

Post by echelon »

pixelsort wrote: post #355
NiloCK wrote: post #67

A concern: More and more plainly, OpenAI and Anthropic are making plays to own (and lease) the "means of production" in software. OK - I'm a pretty happy renter right now. As they gobble up previously open software stacks, how viable is it that these stacks remain open? It seems perfectly sensible to me that these providers and their users alike have an interest in further centralizing the dev lifecycle - eg, if Clau…

In the many darker timelines that one can extrapolate, capturing essential tech stacks is just a pre-cursor to capturing hiring. Once we start seeing Open AI and Anthropic getting into the certifications and testing they'll quickly become the gold standard. They won't even need to actually test anyone. People will simply consent to having their chat interactions analyzed. The models collect more information about us…

As if there will be hiring in the fullness of time.

There will come a day when you can will an entire business into existence at the press of a button. Maybe it has one or two people overseeing the business logic to make sure it doesn't go off the rails, but the point is that this is a 100x reduction in labor and a 100,000x speed up in terms of delivery.

They'll price this as a $1M button press.

Suddenly, labor capital cannot participate in the market anymore. Only financial capital can.

Suddenly, software startups are no longer viable.

This is coming.

The means of production are becoming privatized capital outlays, just like the railroads. And we will never own again.

There is nothing that says our careers must remain viable. There is nothing that says our output can remain competitive, attractive, or in demand. These are not laws.

Knowledge work may be a thing of the past in ten years' time. And the capital owners and hyperscalers will be the entirety of the market.

If we do not own these systems (and at this point is it even possible for open source to catch up?), we are fundamentally screwed.

I strongly believe that people not seeing this - downplaying this - are looking the other way while the asteroid approaches.

This. Is. The. End.

Post reply on HN