The author of this post is complaining about CSS-Tricks not getting paid.
If the person who works ("works") for Digital Ocean but is not getting paid, should pretty leave immediately if that is the case. :) I.e, demanding on some moral premise that this other guy who I don't like is getting money, is quite a "far-left" way to go about it.
The author of the post (Vale) is talking about how the editor of CSS Tricks (Geoff) is not being paid by the owner of CSS Tricks (Digital Ocean)
This is not the first issue since Digital Ocean acquired CSS Tricks.
I’d encourage you to educate yourself more on the situation instead of discounting people as “far-left” (whatever you think that means in this context)
Well, the post is calling David Heinemeir Hansson "far-right". I'd instead encourage him, and perhaps you, to educate yourself on what that means, then read up on his blog post(s).
Here’s a section from the Wikipedia page on far right politics:
> Key to the far-right worldview is the notion of societal purity, often invoking ideas of a homogeneous community based on cultural, ethnic, national, racial, or religious lines or a combination of them
It sounds like DHH is talking about “societal purity” and is “invoking ideas of a homogeneous community based on cultural, ethnic, national, racial, or religious lines”
If he is, then that sure seems like far right politics to me.
Right, but DHH's argument isn't about cultural homogeneity for the sake of it, but rather the consequences of what the other cultures have brought. Reading further from links from the blog, either to his other posts, to the Tommy Robinson march, etc., would tell you that. I.e, you conflate race with merit - because they do associate in the statistics sense, but one is not the other.
The OP on the other hand demands funds from a private company, main argument being that "this other person, who I don't like, got money, then a website I do like, should too".
I don’t really want to argue with you about whether DHH is far right because it’s tangential to the main point of the article and based on your response I don’t think we’d agree.
It’s not about “giving money to a website” it’s about the fact that Digital Ocean purchased a business and hired an employee and then ghosted that employee and stopped paying them (without firing them or shuttering the business.) Thats messed up
While unfortunate that the website is inactive, then any employer is pretty much free to let go any employee (and the employee dispute this if they have grounds for it from contracts). Not to circle back to the left/right topic, but if you think this is "messed up", then I'm not sure how you think the world works at all.
If the love for that site is so great, I'm sure someone will pick it up. Otherwise, I'd doubt "size of love" we are talking about here.
People are also being trained/acculturated to LLM speak, so even if they are trained on human output, they could be getting reinforcement for their LLM-tinged crap-speak.
I have something like that running locally for my agentic harness (which includes cross-model messaging). There's a dedicated "product manager" session for it, and all other PMs are instructed to report issues with the harness as they occur to that session, while it is tasked to automatically prioritize and address them and coordinate fix deployment with other running sessions.
It works surprisingly well. The errors fixed are both genuine errors in the harness itself, but increasingly so upstream bugs (in the underlying agent apps like Codex, or in Herdr, which is used to expose uniform programmatic access to all those different apps) for which it needs to come up with workarounds. No regressions so far.
The cost is hard to judge on a subscription, especially when you're running really heavy tasks otherwise that dwarf any harness work.
These mathematicians dedicated their life to math and were working for a long time to achieve the pinnacle of their careers.
OpenAI just burned millions of dollars over a weekend after hearing that someone else was close to solving the problems. Their interest was in their AI system more than the actual math problems.
I see how it can be devastating to their ego, but no, I don't see a particular difference in a company spending money for clout vs. a person spending time for clout. The underlying motivation is the same.
for many fairly strong mathematicians, the career calculus is fame and status (mild though it may be) through mathematics or anonymity but financial reward in tech or finance. Yes, clout by becoming a lifelong academic is in fact rational for some and part of their motivation. Of course they really like what they do as well, but earning the respect of the peers they know are also respected by a large swathe of society is very important.
I guess that type of “clout” feels different to me.
Wanting to be validated by peers for your talents in a niche field vs. using millions to try to solve a math problem that you don’t really care about with AI to market the gigantic company you work for.
That fairly insular community pretty much gave up on commercial success in order to be insular. But the commercial forces were not happy being commercially successful, so they decided to disturb even their insular and commercially-unviable activities.
The point is that nearly every white collar worker is in the same boat right now, and the majority of them probably have already had much more profound impacts to their fields. So yeah, we can certainly imagine what it’s like for mathematicians.
I’m not sure what to tell you. With only a few exceptions, the shorthand follows a very predictable pattern if you already know the property names. IDE completions help too.
Yeah this is my main beef with Tailwind. There are lots of modern CSS features that are really nice that you have to hack into Tailwind because they don’t really fit into a utility model.
(Any complex grid model for example. If you haven’t used grid template areas try them out! They are by far my favorite way to do complex responsive layouts)
The editor of CSS Tricks who was hired by Digital Ocean is the one who is not getting paid.
I think it is morally in the right for employees to get paid by their employers
reply