mimixco

Indeed. Recursion requires that a procedure calls (or recurses over) itself.

Ah, good ole CASE. It's back like mold every few years and this year it's hot and humid.

There are no video demos on their site for one simple reason: when you do find one on the YouTubes you'll see that it is very much programming. If you can create correct CRUD by dragging around "dynamic expressions" (yes, they're really called that), you could write them in TS.

As frosting on the cake, they offer gig workers to no-code for you! My father would make a comment here about wiping one's own ass.

For enterprise is what I meant. Not for individuals.

It's sad to read about the dev headaches caused by today's poor virtualization environments. I distinctly remember that stuff was no work at all at IBM. It didn't interfere one bit with the actual work of coding on the products. In fact, we really never thought about setups or creating environments for testing or development.

In peer reviews, for example, it was standard to bring output from both the failing case and the working case as printed handouts. Those were easy to generate; just spin up two machines and fix one while you leave the other broken. They can share resources if you like so you don't have recreate everything. That is horribly messy today. Testing is so hard most people don't do it.

It was so simple internally, they could have ported those tools to a GUI. But GUI's and user interfaces are not something IBM has ever done well (other than command line ones).

Sidenote: In VM, you could spawn a new machines with "physical" storage or drives (Nothing was physical on the mainframe; everything is faked just for you! Awesome.) by typing a single command at the command prompt! If you needed to fix a bug in some combination of operating system and IBM products, you could spawn that exact customer-replicating environment in about 2 lines of text.

Try that with Kubernetes!

Just like the PC, they didn't realize it was important until it was too late. In my experience, mainframes are a superior way to develop and run every kind of software. The PC is a crippled, stupid stepchild by any reasonable comparison. Just the idea that you need to setup and manage 1,000 of them to come close to a small mainframe is ludicrous. Who needs the overhead and maintenance? Sure, you can swap machines and distribute loads between them, but who wants to? Yuck. It's a lot nicer to have that stuff handled automatically.

Also like the PC, IBM didn't realize that their boxes could be used for this new funky thing called the internet. Talk about blind-sighted. Their first web product was an abomination they inherited from their purchase of Lotus. It didn't work and produced unusable websites, boding poorly for IBM's entry into that market which was already taking off with Active Server Pages and XMLHTTP.

If IBM had loudly (and correctly) proclaimed that mainframes were the place to run web services, everyone and their mother would be running mainframes right now instead of Linux boxes. IBM's eventual realization of this led to their purchase of Red Hat!

I read recently that Tesla would be out of business if it weren't for the tax credits and public money they received. That's not much of a compliment to one's business skills.

IBM has amazing support software for mainframes. Their fix tool, for example (SMTP/E) makes individual tapes for each customer to ensure that fixes go on correctly. All the dependencies are resolved for that individual customer by IBM before the tape ships. That's one-on-one service that makes sure your machine doesn't go down from a patch.

In a high availability environment (like banking or airline reservations, as mentioned), mainframes never go off, even during upgrades. When physical machines need replacement, the entire system is run in parallel on a second machine.

These boxes have both incredible I/O hardware (there's never been anything like IBM channel I/O) and the software to keep everything humming. On a typical day when I worked there, we'd have a 1,000 devs using the same box (and that was a small installation) with multiple operating systems, virtualizations, etc. with zero hiccups.

IBM also has amazing software for getting stuff done. Documentation, for example, is universal and available worldwide from any terminal. When you want a printed manual, the system figures out which big, fast printer is near you and offers to print it down the hall. Every IBM employee has access to all the company's resources from every terminal, and it all just works.

Yes, PCs have caught up to emulating many of these features, but they definitely don't have the robustness or ease of use that System/370 (z/OS) did.

I used to fix compilers for IBM and we worked on (older versions of) these machines. They were awesome! Coming to the PC business after using mainframes was a sad joke. You should see what it's like working with VM, IBM's virtualization environment. It was amazing and that was 25 years ago.

I've decided to release our formerly-paid product as a fully free download for Windows or Mac.

Changes from Wiki.js:

> Packaged for Windows[0] and Mac[1] (Electron)

> PostgresSQL built-in, no setup

> Telemetry removed

> Added support for 30+ languages, no downloads

> Added FontAwesome 6 Pro (licensed)

> Added Inter font library

For documentation, examples, and videos, visit http://miki.mimix.io.

Miki is a rich and powerful wiki with markdown and a great UI. It's got lots of options for backup and offers total hands-on control. It works completely offline. As far as I know, it's the only program like this that's fully packaged and ready to run on your desktop.

Let me know what you think, and enjoy!

[0] https://github.com/themimixcompany/miki-desktop/releases/tag...

[1] https://github.com/themimixcompany/miki-desktop/releases/tag...

My favorite thing about Lucid is that they have Tesla DNA but, it seems, a different approach to ethics and PR. I read their entire prospectus cover-to-cover and it is refreshingly free of any Elon-style hype. (Lucid's founder was Tesla's chief engineer and is clearly choosing to model his own company differently.)

Their business model is remarkably simple and clear. The product seems to be targeting a very high level customer (much higher level than Tesla). And they've made incredible progress on their own battery factory and car assembly plant.

Fun fact, Lucid was in the battery business before cars and their batteries are used in every Formula EV car currently racing.

Undoubtedly true. I have 10,000 song files with the same problem!

There's a lot of great EV discussion here on HN but I don't see Lucid mentioned very often, which is a shame because they look like a real Tesla competitor and another company that could help bring mass commercialization of EVs, especially in the US where they're building them.

The TL;DR is that CCIV is a SPAC funded by Saudi money (about $4B worth) that just merged with Lucid (it was created for that purpose), so now the car company is fully funded for production and went public with their stock.

That's a terrific use case, albeit super niche. I'm an artist, too. It would be fantastic to have ML help in identifying new paintings or other art (or just ones you don't know) and classifying them as belonging to an artist, movement, school, or period.

I learned this stuff the old-fashioned way, through flash cards, slides, and lots of memorization in art history class. People like you and I can tell if something is more Diebenkorn than Duchamp, but that's a specialized skill that ML could probably duplicate quite well and would be very useful for teaching art and art critique.

I can see that it would be useful in a professional capacity where having 50,000 photos was part of the job. But I must ask, what do you do with those photos? Do you really cull through them and share them or use them again? 50,000 of them? It seems like you've made the case for the memory hole I was talking about.

Of course, any software always had edge cases and niche uses. My complaint primarily was that this seems to fall in the bucket of not-terribly-useful-whiz-bang-stuff that Apple (and, by all means, not only Apple) likes to include so they have something to do PR about. Animoji was definitely in this category and every FAANG company is guilty of this to some degree.

I cannot imagine that, if you surveyed 10,000 users, even one of them would list "on-device facial recognition" as a feature that they need or want from their phones.

Most cases of child abuse and neglect take place out of the eyesight of others or they would be stopped. The problem is not that you didn't see it. The problem in all of these organizations from churches to Michael Jackson to Penn State is that there were people who knew it was going on and they didn't stop it. In every case I've ever heard of from the endemic abuse in British schools to the church's continual reshuffling of known abusers (without kicking out a single one) depended on people who did know and didn't say anything, and those people were always people in power in the organization.

Not sure why this was downvoted. I just tested it again and it works fine. Try it yourself or see if this post is still up: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27962833

Pull requests don't mean the code gets integrated. It's just someone sharing a suggestion. Unless that suggestion happens to be on the project's to-do list or it fixes an open bug, I'd say it's unlikely to get merged.

Elasticsearch's top contributors (the three I checked) seem to work for Elastic, which goes to what I'm saying. No profit-making business can have its workflow dictated by the public. Even if a pull request is accepted, the team has to go through all the same code review and testing processes as if the code had originated in-house, and that's not always feasible or on the timeline when the request comes in.

Sure it does. Just type in both boxes before you hit submit.

Nearly all of those things apply to all currencies. Would that it were true that fiat wasn't used in extortion or manipulated by anybody. Wouldn't that be great.

Explain, please, why Bitcoin needs fiat? If two people exchange goods or services for Bitcoin, where is the fiat? If you get your Bitcoin and I get my Ferrari, isn't the transaction completed?

How, exactly, would this be achieved? You'd have to filter every internet packet looking for bitcoin transactions and, as soon as you start doing that, someone will figure out how to bury them so your snooping doesn't work and Bitcoin will go right on running.

One may not like decentralized currencies (and I certainly don't like the scammy ones and the crappy exchanges) but that first word in their name makes 'em really hard to stop.

When the lawsuit story was posted on Fox News, it got thousands of comments. I scrolled them, looking for one person who admitted that this was taking place and had been for a long time. Not one. The thread was full of posters proclaiming that scouts were great and nothin' bad never happened to no kids while they was there. Your stats and the lawsuit itself would seem to decry that claim. The denial surrounding that organization is reaching the levels found in the you-know-which church.

I don't think there's any escape from the ugly world of packaging if you're going cross platform. And, can I ask, why does it have to be native? IMHO, the "right" (easy) way to do cross platform apps today is to do them with web technologies, like Spotify. They have an app that runs everywhere and, at the core, is just HTML/JS/CSS. That's truly cross-platform and, to be honest, the packaging (we used Electron for ours) isn't that terrible.

I think you'll find native UI coding for different devices is a nightmare while HTML/JS UI coding for different devices is 99% sameness.

People who use trucks for work have reported that they won't be able to use a Cybertruck because they can't load anything from the sides, a major inconvenience.

You are right that most big FOSS projects don't want your contributions, another ugly fact behind the open source myth. And why would they? How could you control code quality if you let randos write your stuff? You can't. No reasonable organization that is trying to make money from software would rely on people outside that organization to write or fix it.

So mined diamonds are bad because mining is, in general bad. Got it. Now we have synthetics and those are bad because... they take away jobs from miners? You can't have it both ways.

This is a natural, logical, and surely profitable extension of their business. Say what you will about Elon (and I'm no fan), but his charging infrastructure and the simplicity of using it are light years beyond anyone else's. VW only built ChargeAmerica because they were forced to by DieselGate. No one else has built anything. From the videos I see on YouTube, charging at anyone else's station is a joke compared to Tesla.

I hope they take over and own this market of chargers. It would be a big step toward getting electrification everywhere.

Software was originally free. It was necessary to use the machines so it was supplied by their makers. (I worked at IBM when this began to change.) It was also all open source before that went away in favor of closed and proprietary licenses, which customers pushed back on greatly.

While some companies do make money selling software, they're fewer and further between than ever. Most of the money in the software business is in hosting, service, support, or advertising. The biggest players in our industry make more money from that stuff than from selling licenses. Microsoft, Google, Facebook, Netflix, and Amazon are all software-based businesses but software licenses aren't their source of revenue.

The vast majority of software is worth nothing. Statistically, most computer programs will only be used by one person -- the person who wrote them. There are millions of GitHub repos full of software with absolutely zero monetary value, as evidenced by the fact that no one pays for it. A tiny, tiny fraction of software programs reach "escape velocity" and become important enough to pay for, and to pay people to work on. This is definitely the exception and not the norm.

None of this is a condemnation of software or other copyrighted works. I'm a published author and artist as well as a software developer and I definitely get it. As for our desktop software, we charge for the fact that we packaged it into the desktop version. That's human work and it was quite difficult. If you don't need that, you can get (and setup) an almost identical product for free.

One easy way is not to offer a license at all. Just like when you visit a news website, for example. No license is being given to you. You're just a consumer of the website. If you're selling a SaaS, all your work is copyright unless you license it to someone, so just don't.

If you're selling something that can be built or downloaded on someone else's computer, there are lots of proprietary licenses you can use and even some open source ones. I hate AGPL, for example, but it is a license that would prevent AWS from selling your software as a service without disclosing a lot of stuff they won't disclose (their other software that makes AWS run).