Man, I was deep into this blog post before I was able to answer the question "what is Neki?".

https://neki.dev/ is a much more terse overview of neki

Now that's a nice release page.

If I don't know what I'm reading about by the third or fourth phrase, I skip it. Empty language comes from empty minds and I don't have time for that.

She had sued Data Colada, I believe about that post. Seems like it got dismissed: https://www.science.org/content/article/honesty-researcher-s...

Oh wow. From your link

> The fallout from the saga is likely to continue. Simonsohn and several of Gino’s co-authors last year launched a project to assess the reliability of her past papers. So far, this has led to a further retraction in February and a correction in July. Science reported in April that Gino also appeared to have plagiarized passages of text in some of her publications.

It’s also hilarious how the judge let her continue the suit against Harvard. Like “hey I plagiarized fine, but you focused on my plagiarism more than others’ that not fair”. Even as more retractions due to plagiarism kept coming…

I think we've seen recently that it is a dark kind of funny. When your standards for catching fraud are as low as top academia, and expectations might be beyond the probable without it, it creates a conundrum when someone with a prejudice starts to pick targets to actually investigate.

Kudos to Data Colada for sticking to their guns and not being cowed by that law suit. More power to them.

Nobody goes there anymore, its too crowded.

That sun is very similar to the one from the background of this other top HN post about the OS museum: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=48195009

Could this open Cantor Fitzgerald up to class action law suits from consumers who ultimately paid the refunded tariffs?

I'd imagine it'd open the federal government to such a suit.

It stole money from consumers in the form of illegal tariffs, then refunded the money to people with no obvious relationship to the victims.

Doubtful since any sane person knew the tariffs were not legal and would eventually be overturned.

I would say in this case it makes it enigmatic.

Tailwind Plus is great - I love the lifetime access, but I always wondered how sustainable that model was. Even without AI, how many of those memberships could they sell?

I thought the same, and yet on the other hand, how could they have done it differently? People don't want to pay a subscription just to write a DSL of CSS. Perhaps they could've done it per project like some companies, but I don't think it'd be as popular as their lifetime model. Ironic.

We can go back to how software was sold decades ago: you pay for version 1.0, and get bugfixes for the 1.x series. Then 2.0 is released, and if you want it, you pay again for the 2.x series. And so on.

I agree on not wanting a subscription for something like this. But I also acknowledge that if people are still doing work on something post-sale (beyond bugfixes for a pre-defined support period), I should maybe expect to have to pay for that continuing work.

MUI sells paid components paid monthly. Definitely doable for the paid product.

I'm not super familiar with tailwind plus, but I am familiar with MUI.

MUIs paid offerings are open-core, you pay for support and a couple of extra features.

Tailwind plus looks like paying for basic components (checkboxes, sidebars, buttons) and it doesn't even offer anything like DataGrid (free with mui).

> and it doesn't even offer anything like

Shows Tailwind was just too little too late.

I've been using Claude Code in their iOS app (on a Pro account). I just point it at my GitHub repo, and tell it to work on one of the issues I created. It required very little setup beyond what I did for Claude Code CLI.

i've seen that work well on existing codebases, but bootstrapping a codebase that way is like pulling teeth in my past experiences.

so it really sort of falls back to what you're doing with the llm. code maintenance isn't novel development, which isn't polishing.

> Any consolidation like this seems like a negative for consumers.

I tend to see much more discussion about how the main downside is for sellers of content. Why is this bad for consumers?

Watterson serves as one of the symbols of an era when selling out was considered a great sin. It makes me laugh how thoroughly that idea - that selling out is bad - has been defeated.

That being said, I'm sure he would've done it the same way today.