GHA have always been a PITA for any serious DevOps; it's quite clear they were designed to integrate in 7 lines of code and then tell everyone who complains that they're doing it wrong.
It is a PITA, but that can be significantly improved IMHO if you just write shell script wrappers for your tasks. Not only does it make it easier to run CI locally, but it also makes it so much easier to move platforms in the future.
When the GH action YAML is just invoking shell scripts, I find it quite pleasant to use
That's mostly been my approach as well... I've also started relying on Deno for a lot of general shell scripting as you can use repository modules without an install step and shebang works outside Windows (or inside with bash).
I think that's the point, these spaces greatly prefer recurring donations because a) the aggregate value is usually more than a one-off and b) they're much easier to reason about, as they're more "evened out".
'a' isn't very interesting though. Preferring more money because its more is very very uninteresting.
'b' is probably the point the person was trying to make - if they'd said "I would prefer $32/month rather than $1000 one-off" it would be a much more interesting comment, talking about the relationship between value and the commitment to the space.
Today I set up a NWA210BE (Zyxel) to replace a unifi 6+ AP; I bought it second hand and my key metrics were: 4x4 MIMO, available used/discounted, current gen, fully functional standalone mode.
The 4x4 makes all the difference. Sitting in my car the 6+ would fight with my 4G for internet and cause maps to be super slow; now I'm off the property before its unusable.
I had intended to put APs in multiple rooms, but there doesn't seem like much point now.
I've stuck with my Eero Pro 6 because it has 4x4 at 5GHz and the Pro 6E and 7 trade that for 2x2 at both 5GHz and 6GHz. The Max 7 has 4x4 on both 5Ghz and 6Ghz, but for a 3-pack for my house, the current pricing on amazon.ca is $2300, compared to the $650 I paid for the Pro 6 3-pack. (And the Pro 6 seems to have notably lower power draw than the Max 7.)
I have a Netgear WAX218, one of the last cheap business-class APs I could find that don't require a cloud service to manage. WAY better than the pro-sumer wifi routers I was running before in access point mode. I'll have to look into Zyxel offerings a bit more when I'm ready to replace my Netgear.
What benefit does 4x4 give you? I haven't seen a single client station with more than 1x1 or 2x2. Do you have so many clients that transmit concurrently?
> But as a very significant bonus, the 'extra' antennas if there is a mismatch in MIMO levels between the client and router do not go unused, but are used for 'diversity' and 'beamforming', which extends range, and improves speed at range.
You don't get higher max speed, but you do get better performance in general. I hadn't expected it to be drastic - I had thought it would be more theoretical than practical - so I had been planning on adding some 2x2 APs in a few months; but I don't think I need to now.
The original drive was because I have 4x4 on my desktop which won't get wired in for at least a year now; and my homelab is wired in.
While it seems like an interesting point - a kind of 'doubling down' - its not clear cut at all.
Firstly, the dichotomy you presented for the individual is: succeed, live, and make loads of money vs fail, die, and lose a fair chunk. The argument you make with this dichotomy is that the gambling doesn't affect anything. However the reality is that there are many ways for the mission to end - fail, live, lose a fair chunk being notable because when the mission is going sideways the individual becomes incentivised to put themselves and others at greater risk to make a successful outcome more likely. Succeed, live, lose your squad mates, make loads of money becomes more likely as well as fail, live, lose your squad mates.
Secondly, insider trading is and always will be a signal for others. If you're only allowed to bet in one direction it becomes a form of information leak - monitor who is liquidating their assets to gamble on outcomes. For any project it becomes a signal to others - if your boss isn't remortgaging to gamble more then you know its time to jump ship. This will in turn have significant effects on outcomes.
I often have Claude commit and pr; on the last week I've seen several instances of it deciding to do extra work as part of the commit. It falls over when it tries to 'git add', but it got past me when I was trying auto mode once
I do find the activities a little suspect - it has 1 turn of planning for me in the last 30 days. I have claude write plans first before every coding session, often using one agent session to plan and then output a plan file, and then others to execute on it. I also have several repos dedicated to 'planning' in the sense of what should I do next based on what emails/tickets/bugs etc. I have. In other words - I do all kinds of planning!
This does not surprise me.