vibe coded website too -- I waited 4 seconds for it to load

At least it loaded, it did not on my side.

Make a friend. Keep talking to that friend. Put reminders, say good morning, or write it. Call them, ask how it's going.

Send them a 5 minute audio about something interesting in your day. Schedule a meet up, like you did as kids. "Lets hang out after ~~school~~ work today".

It's not as easy to make friends when you don't meet new people all the time, and it's hard to keep them when you're not forced to see them every day (because of school or something).

Make a friend or maybe two, and do this. It takes effort, but you'll be more fulfilled.

It's okay to just meet up, hang out, watch some YouTube together, play a game, go on a walk, or do legal drugs (coffee, beer, whatever)

I highly suspect that these people who push for paid open source are NOT open source maintainers.

If I wanted to get paid for the software I make in my free time, I would put a price on it.

If someone likes what I do personally, they can donate on my Patreon or kofi or whatever.

If I want my project to only be used for other free software, then I make it GPL or AGPL. That's it.

If someone uses my software and works for a company and needs support, we can talk about a support contract.

Some definitely are, but I think you're right to keep an eye out. I don't think that the thing open source needs is more foundations with compensated presidents and community managers and fundraising departments

We shamefully hear too much about the bad foundations (especially Mozilla and Wikimedia).

The good foundations remain working quietly in the shadows.

Much of the article is about getting people to pay for services around open source, specifically package registries. Big users paying to use a package registry hardly sounds unreasonable.

its not actually clear what the article is about, and it has the usual journalistic conflation of concepts (market cap is not the same thing as income!).

I don't expect to get paid for the open source work I do in my free time. But I would also really like it if I could work on open source software full time (or for the software I work on at my day job to be open source), but to do so I would need a source of income from somewhere.

Indeed, by definition, someone trying to charge for "open source" is not an open source developer. They're a for-profit developer.

For anyone wondering; this isn't a hack, that's the same library, just as good, just without boost dependencies.

Thanks for pointing this out! This may not obvious not everybody.

Also, this is not some random GitHub Repo, Chris Kohlhoff is the developer of ASIO :)

A lot of the ID verification stuff is coming FROM those companies

I’ve just been stung by iOS 26.4’s implementation of the age-gate. My only option has been to rollback with a 26.3.1 IPSW.

I unlurked and made a thread last night, but I think it might be hidden due to account age: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47511919

Yep, your post and this comment were hidden. I vouched for them so they're visible now. Good luck!

> Erect a great firewall

Yes and nobody would do anything to stop it, really :(

To all the vibe coders:

When you let an LLM author code, it takes ownership of that code (in the engineering sense).

When you're done spending millions on tokens, years of development, prompt fine tuning, model fine tuning, and made the AI vendor the fattest wad of cash ever seen, you know what the vendor will do?

You have to migration path. Your Codex prompts don't work the same in Claude. All the prompts you developed and saved in commits, all the (probably proprietary) memory the AI vendor saved in their servers to make the AI lock you in even more, all of it is worthless without the vendor.

You are inventing "ah heck, we need to pay the consultant another 300 bucks an hour to take a look at this, because nobody else owns this code", but supercharged.

You're locking yourself in, to a single vendor, to such a degree that they can just hold your code hostage.

Now sure, OpenAI would NEVER do this, because they're all just doing good for humanity. Sure. What if they go out of business? Or discontinue the model that works for you, and the new ones just don't quite respond the same to your company's well established workflows?

It is the same as adding dependencies or hosting on Azure/Aws, choosing a nosql db isn't it?

Well, except it's your entire codebase, yeah

It's almost like I addressed my entire comment to vibe coders and NOBODY else, because other uses of AI are pretty valid

You have to be incredibly incompetent and naiive to look at the absolute garbage theatre that AI outputs today to go "yeah this will write all future code".

Usually the response, for the last years, has been "no no you don't get it, it'll get so much better" and then they make the context window slightly larger and make it run python code to do math.

What will really happen is that you and people like you will let Claude or some other commerical product write code, which it then owns. The second Claude becomes more expensive, you will pay, because all your tooling, your "prompts saved in commits" etc. will not work the same with whatever other AI offer.

You've just reinvented vendor lock in, or "highly paid consultant code", on a whole new level.

Can you explain what you think will happen, actually? People at OpenAi and Anthropic aren’t longer coding by hand. Are you saying everyone changes their mind and goes back? Not gonna happen. You have to work around this new constrain.

Yes, I'm saying that the companies who's entire business model is selling you AIs are not a reliable source. And of course, again, if you are competent, you can see that AI only generates passable outputs when guided or when the scope is small. This guiding only works when there is a human operator.

You're all being fooled by emergent behavior, which acts like intelligence, but really doesn't fool people who are familiar with how to write code.

I'm sorry, I'm not sure how to say this without sounding elitist, but the goal post has not moved since GPT 3. These tools, autonomously, produce code that only fools the clueless. I don't know how else to put it and I'm getting really tired of this argument that "look, company with billions and some of the buggiest shittest software is using AI to write it". No shit they are.

So what's going to happen? We will see the same divide we've seen with JavaScript. It's new, then everyone says it's what everyone must use. C++ developers no longer needed--its all JS now. No need for native UIs, it's all JS now. If you're not learning the latest web tech, you'll miss out and fall behind. If you're studying for anything but web, you'll be out of a job in 5 years. And now, a couple decades later, we are still waiting for it.

I'm currently involved in the hiring process in our company, selecting engineers for my team. If someone applies who has the programming language we ask for in their CV, they get a first interview. If they can read code, and write VERY basic code, they will get through at least the first 2 rounds without any issues.

If people put down the AI, and actually learn how to write a `for` loop, they would be more hire-able than 50% of candidates.

> "Guess it's death [...] for introverts"

There is a meritocracy somewhere in our capitalist system. Not everyone participates, but it exists.

OP was saying the only way to get hired is through work connections

of course if the process doesn't involve networking then we don't have a problem, we agree on that

> OP was saying the only way to get hired is through work connections

That is not at all what I said. Please do not misrepresent.

I said they took a targeted approach *and* exercised their networks. Those are two separate things.

> One thing they all had in common was taking a very targeted approach with their search and leveraging their networks

Right, so they applied to a couple of jobs and it worked for them?

I'm sorry, do you understand how uncommon and rare that is? sure, if their domain was REALLY niche and the jobs weren't publicly advertised, then i could see how that would work. but the experience is VASTLY different outside such niche cases

They applied to a couple of jobs where they were certain the fit would be good, and didn't mindlessly spam their resume to some bot. They got in touch with the right people, and worked it out from there. Because they had done their homework, the path was easier for them.

yes, that's exactly what you said before. you're not engaging with what i'm saying at all.

I had this with Rust. I always saw the huge hype, especially some years ago, and it was hugely off-putting. Ridiculous projects like rewriting famously full coverage branch tested projects like SQLite in Rust, or rewriting the GNU coreutils, and always spamming "blazing fast" and "written in Rust (crab emoji)" was very, very hostile to a C++ developer.

When I eventually got around to using Rust, I was hooked, and now I don't use C++ anymore if I can choose Rust instead. The hype was not completely unjustified, but it was also misplaced, and to this day I disagree with most of those hype projects.

It was no issue to silently pick up Rust, write some code that solves problems, and enjoy it as a very very good language. I don't feel a need to personally contact C or C++ project maintainers and curse at them for not using Rust.

I do the same with AI. I'm not going around screaming at people who dare to write code by hand, going "Claude will replace you", or "I could vibe code this for 10 bucks". I silently write my code, I use AI where I find it brings value, and that's it.

Recognize these tools for what they are: Just tools. They have use-cases, tradeoffs, and a massive community of incompetent idiots who like it ONLY because they don't know better, not because they understand the actual value. And then there's the normal, every day engineers, who use tools because, and ONLY because, they solve a problem.

My advice: Don't be an idiot. It's not the solution for all problems. It can be good without being the solution to a problems. It can be useful without replacing skill. It can add value without replacing you. You don't have to pick a side.