1,350 karma · joined April 7, 2009
previously the same at Clever (S12)
https://github.com/rgarcia
https://www.raf.xyz
But no MCP server today has tools that appear on page load, change with every SPA route, and die when you close the tab. Client support for this would have to be tightly coupled to whatever is controlling the browser.
What they really built is a browser-native tool API borrowing MCP's shape. If calling it "MCP" is what gets web developers to start exposing structured tools for agents, I'll take it.
It requires you to know the phone number of the signer, but for important stuff you typically do.
This is consistent with a (reasonable) belief that microservice architecture is an important design pattern to support, but may not be the best approach for all problems. From reading the docs, my sense is that Nomad takes the position that for a cluster scheduler, fewer moving parts leads to lower operational overhead, which outweighs any benefit that microservices may bring. E.g., it's more difficult to deploy a microservice platform like Nomad if the platform itself is deployed as a set of microservices.
If you put everything in a Vanguard target retirement fund, your expense ratio is something like 0.18%. [1]
So as long as tax loss harvesting adds a tiny fraction of a percent (~0.07%) to your returns, it seems optimal to use Wealthfront, no?
[1] https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0699&...
My point is that you shouldn't have to learn a long list of tools in order to learn the underlying framework the project is trying to introduce.
I can easily remove stuff I don't need, even when I don't know how it works. But adding JS tooling myself? What a disaster.
Really? I've walked in on quite a few existing gulp/grunt/insert-latest-hotness setups and found them incredibly hard to follow (let alone unwind) without a solid understanding of these tools.
:thumbsup: to this sentiment. Whenever I see a "skeleton" starter project that includes tooling that could easily be added at a later date, I usually close the tab.
I think people forget that skeleton projects need to serve an educational purpose to newcomers. Each additional framework/tool that you throw into the mix compromises the skeleton's ability to do that.
It lets us spin up a service + all dependent services locally with a single command.
I'd be really interested to hear how teams codify this. To the extent that it's possible, I think feedback should be rooted in objective measures, e.g. styleguide/lint violations, test failures, etc. All too often, though, there are subjective things that come up: organization of code, interface design, using framework X instead of framework Y. These are the criticisms that most often lead to aggressive back and forths.
As for your point about premature optimization, in my opinion a startup's first priority is getting something in front of users in order to start improving and iterating. The first version of the data pipeline discussed in the blog post was built when Clever was in 0 schools, so designing it to scale to some of the largest school districts in the country would have been fairly presumptuous.
Bonus points if it has some way of verifying that passwords were actually changed and the new password is strong.
Doesn't allow for tab-delimited or any-character-delimited text and handles "Quotes, Commas, and Tab" characters in fields.
Clever helps schools bring digital learning to the classroom. We take care of the massive amount of data that needs to move behind the scenes, letting schools focus on using technology to improve learning.
We're hiring engineers - full-stack generalists, as well as specialists in security and infrastructure.
Join a small team (20, half engineers) that's on to something big. Over 1/9 schools in the US use Clever today. Most development is in Javascript, Go, and Python.
Learn more & apply online: https://clever.com/about or send me an email if you have questions (raf@, I'm cofounder/CTO).
This argument seems flawed. If I think someone is going to double the value of my company, should I be comfortable giving them up to 100% equity? Put another way: percentage growth of your company from an early stage to some point in the future most often exceeds 100%.
Here's a simplified version of the dockerfile template we use: https://gist.github.com/rgarcia/7917826. It basically outsources all of the work to a salt state.