Astral to Join OpenAI
471–480 of 951 posts
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#472A 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…
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#473Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#474Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you could. I would stare longingly into the void, wondering if I can ever work another python project after having experienced uv, ruff, and ty. Such an outcome would make me wonder regarding the wisdom of "It is better to have love and lost than to have never loved at all."
It is an MIT licensed project, someone will absolutely fork it.
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#475This is a serious risk for the open source ecosystem and particularly the scientific ecosystem that over the last years has adopted many of these technologies. Having their future depend on a cap-ex heavy company that is currently (based on reporting) spending approx. 2.5 dollars to make a dollar of revenue and must have hypergrowth in the next years or perish is less than ideal. This should discourage anybody doing…
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#476A 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…
[flagged]
There is also a really good ecosystem of libraries, especially for scientific computing. My experience has been that Claude can write good c++ code, but it's not great about optimization. So, curated Python code can often be faster than an AI's reimplementation of an algorithm in c++.
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#477Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure, but if tomorrow uv and ruff ceased to exist, we could all go back to any number of other solutions.
Maybe you could. I would stare longingly into the void, wondering if I can ever work another python project after having experienced uv, ruff, and ty. Such an outcome would make me wonder regarding the wisdom of "It is better to have love and lost than to have never loved at all."
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#478So, any good alternatives to uv?
pixi? https://pixi.prefix.dev/latest/ Have not tried it too much yet because I was pretty content with `uv`, but I've heard lots of good things about it
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#479Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe you could. I would stare longingly into the void, wondering if I can ever work another python project after having experienced uv, ruff, and ty. Such an outcome would make me wonder regarding the wisdom of "It is better to have love and lost than to have never loved at all."
I was using poetry pretty happily before uv came along. I’d probably go back. Note that uv is fast because — yes, Rust, but also because it doesn’t have to handle a lot of legacy that pip does[1], and some smart language independent design choices. If uv became unavailable, it’d suck but the world would move on. [1] https://nesbitt.io/2025/12/26/how-uv-got-so-fast.html
Re: Astral to Join OpenAI
#480A 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…
[flagged]
Is it? We still need meatspace humans to vet what these AI agents produce. Languages like C++ / Rust etc still require huge cognitive overhead relative to Python & that will not change anytime soon.
Unless the entire global economy can run on agents with minimal human supervision someone still has to grapple with the essential complexity of getting a computer to do useful things. At least with Python that complexity is locked away within the CPython interpreter.
Also an aside, when has a language ever gotten traction based solely on its technical merits? Popularity is driven by ease-of-use, fashion, mindshare, timing etc.