Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | dzonga's commentslogin

nor web engineers (backend) that are not doing standard crud work.

I have seen these shine on frontend work


The US via its military schools i.e West Point etc trains very capable and smart people.

those people could work in private industry & make tons of money but they choose to work for the thankless work of defense

now comes some very incompetent war dodgers - they don't listen to anyone - or even read Sun Tzu's Art of War and go firing first into enemy territory where the enemy has a very real asymmetrical advantage

now the people who had nothing to do with this war are suffering through high fuel costs, higher food prices


unless you a stressful day - with enough hydration - and decent sleep - you can command yourself to wake up without an alarm.

anyone who has gone through boarding school, military etc knows this to be true.


yeah given that HN audience might be mostly from 1st world countries

in the 3rd world - north of Limpopo - and everywhere else - you discover soon that where you born is like being 60 points down with a 2 min warning and you're in your own end zone.

where you are born matters more than your own talent etc by a factor of 10


then we have companies that went the opposite way with the abomination called graphql

Rails for straight up CRUD is top, autogenerated things etc

however if your app doesn't fit the standard crud pattern you end just fiddling with a lot of things that you shouldn't and in that case I recommend Django which provides enough flexibility while providing a good base. There's less magic in Django


Serious question, as someone who started his professional developer career as a RoR developer in 2012: Isn't vibe-coding top for straight up CRUD?

I'm not trying to be glib. The thing that seemed magic to me at that time was all the scaffolding that Rails provided with a few simple commands, making it possible to quickly build something that let the user authenticate and enter and display data. Sure, Ruby itself and the culture around it back then was also great and will always have a place in my heart. But the whole convention-over-configuration and scaffolding thing, that was what I liked so much about it, and I never found that in any other language/framework combo in a way that felt as smooth.

But now, I use AI for scaffolding, and for my side-projects often never have to touch code.

So why would I choose something for a CRUD application that might give me headaches down the road, when there's a possibility that the app might morph into something less conventional, when I could use *any* language/framework that's not as rigid and have the scaffold be built by AI?

I get it if you enjoy actually writing code. But I don't quite get the benefits if the goal is to have something working quickly and be able to potentially build it out to something that is not served that well by RoR.


If you're building a pure SaaS app then Rails is perfect. If you need SaaS + more complex backend services like coordinating tons of webhooks I'd choose Elixir. Documentation sites and light server apps I'd use Node.

Go and Rust fill in lots of gaps for more serious performance stuff.


FWIW modern Rails is fairly magic-free also. They learned. With ActiveJob now part of the framework you get event queues/async processing and whatnot as part of the batteries.

I'm a fanboi, so I am biased, but Rails is still pretty great in 2026 for general business purposes.


>> Oracle is the only one using debt to build the data center

Stargate is backed by the US gvt hence why they're comfortable to put that under debt financing


Learn from the best!

zuck panicked.

the metaverse didn't pan out.

other companies were making inroads on A.I and zuck felt flat-footed.

the crazy shit is in an era where most content on social media is A.I generated - zuck should've pivoted to banning A.I content but eh what do I know


I don't know how he could ban it. AI can't be used to reliably detect AI for the same reasons it's unreliable at other tasks. He didn't really have a choice but to sell the same grift everyone else is selling. He's stuck in a prisoners' dilemma that everyone is losing except a few people at the top.

that's pretty obvious to everyone in the US

what's not obvious to most people - is how e.g other countries that are already struggling will get into deeper depths e.g UK where cost of energy was super high. UK is not bombing Iran, but their economy will cry more than the US

what's not obvious is how a few oil Barrons will make so much money in the next few weeks e.g those in Texas - their great grand-children will never need to work. Defense contractors will also make out like bandits & those politically connected. While everyone else in the US losses.

what's not obvious is the money pumped into A.I so far is about to go kaput (energy demands -- remember Qatar has started not honoring gas contracts - what's gas used to ? power turbines in power plants)

if you're in the US/Netherlands you will be okay in terms of food, if you're in the UK, Middle East, Australia (food is about to become more expensive & tricky)

if you're in Africa your government is about to con you through massive fuel prices at the pump


> if you're in the UK, Middle East, Australia (food is about to become more expensive & tricky)

Australias not in a terrible position. We produce ~50% of our NPK fertilizers used, and this is down primarily because were importing more from places with cheaper/distant environmental impact. Conversely, IIRC, UK and Ineos just shut down their significant last fertilizer plant and the north sea fields is its own thing.

Similarly we have suitable local gas supply for the needed feedstock. And you can see the govt already starting to restrict (“reserve”) exports. Which, of course, will contribute to the global problem.

AU as a whole is a commodity and food exporter. Of course global commodity squeezes make Everyone poorer, I believe ricardo. I dont see our local position being anywhere as fragile as europe and me, unless Im missing something.

But I dont see AU being anywhere near as fragile as Sri Lanka circa 2022-23.


We are vulnerable in Australia though because we have to move food large distances from farms to cities and are unusually road-dependent for those kind of distances (most countries use much more freight rail). Large diesel price rises are going to be extremely painful for us.

And electricity and manufacturing too, since we have no real gas reservation policy and the exporters were allowed to build enough capacity to export basically every single joule of gas that we produce (and they pay a fraction of the royalties that countries like Qatar rake in). So locals and local businesses pay very high prices so the gas companies can export most of our supply overseas...


Diesel price rising can be easily fixed though.

The Government collects 51.6 cents per litre on Fuel and Diesel, they'd need to just temporarily cut back on some of their obscene fuel margins to keep everything within steady-state.

The question is, will the Government do so?


But what if there's not enough diesel?

That's what at stake here, with oil exports from the Middle East dwindling... Oil price might not even go up that much, or for that long, if the economy crashes hard enough.


The Australians are currently pointing to diesel reserves or on hand in the farms is quite low, suggesting that mechanised cropping/transport of farm products is going to provide a pinch point.

I have no idea if the reports are accurate, or an attempt to put the market into readiness for inflation.

edit: Whether real or imagined, there is panic buying of petrol happening - this could lead to supply issues by itself.

https://www.reddit.com/r/australia/comments/1rohwzl/fuel_pan...


As someone who has done physical work at the sites of Australian diesel reserves, they aren't designed to last that long.

I do still feel we're better off than most. We can actually offset the price of fuel by reducing the government excise, and even subsidising it. We've done it before. 2 gulf wars, a global oil crisis, general middle east chaos? Australia has typically done better than most.

Would still be good if we had an actual sovereign mineral fund and hadn't sold our gas rights to everyone else, but I suppose we have to live with the stupid shit the previous governments have done.


The cynic in me thinks we will be squeezed anyway because australian leaders apparently love to sell off everything to the global market with little concern for the residents. Why squeeze just domestic or just global when you can do both and collect even more profit?

> UK where cost of energy was super high. UK is not bombing Iran, but their economy will cry more than the US.

UK isn't exactly rich on energy resources, especially after the North Sea oil dried out. Living in a global economy, most oil is still priced in dollars - which the UK can't print - resulting in a tough energy market in the UK and many other places.

Wars are the worst enemies of good life and economic development, it's profoundly revealing to watch how two of largest and richest countries in the world, with the absolute largest nuclear arsenals, are both engaged in the destruction of other countries - one for each... for now.

Both of the attacked countries are fairly large and have significant impact on global prosperity and supply chains...

This isn't a fairy tale.


>if you're in the US/Netherlands you will be okay in terms of food

I don't get it. Why is Netherlands in the same boat as the US? Do they have some crazy oil reserves I don't know about?


They are a net food exporter.

This is one of likely many shocks that will reward those nations that are leading on cutting fossil fuel use - and punish the laggards.

Even banks are backing out of AI data centers as the risk is too great. Tells you right away that they know the risk exceeds even their willingness to finance the wealthiest ambitions.

Yeah in rich countries nobody is going to starve- at worst you'll have to shop at Aldi. In Africa the price of bread actually matters...

>Yeah in rich countries nobody is going to starve- at worst you'll have to shop at Aldi.

Except that people in rich countries expect a higher bar for their standard of living than just avoiding starvation given the amount of taxes they pay and how expensive life is.

It's not like if you live in a wealthy country it's all sunshine and roses, you're subjected to continuous mass layoffs while still paying wealthy country levels of rent, and people here were already shopping at Lidl to stay afloat. If you keep squeezing them further, they'll just vote the most radical left/right wing candidate who promises to flip the monopoly board over and you don't want that. Telling them to eat (Lidl) cake is never gonna end up well.


> UK where cost of energy was super high

“Was”?


Probably missing 'already', that's how I understood the sentence.

what's the value add ?

what are you offering to candidates - a better interview experience (been tried before etc, those companies closed)

you want to solve a problem, however you are trying solve the problem at a wrong abstraction level -

the problem with the tech market hiring is a coordination problem


[flagged]


thing coz we're people in tech -- we are open to ideas that are non-tech or old school

a lot of creative industries solved this by using agencies, unions and co-ops

if you really want to have success and make an impact start an agency (not the web agency we're used to - but a talent agency)


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: