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

Meh, I think we need to fork github. Gitlab supports the same nonsense github does.


What nonsense are you blathering? Github isn't open source so you can't fork it. Meanwhile there are lots of other GitHub-a-likes out there - Gitlab is only one of them. So if you don't like Gitlab either, there are other choices.


Do you have any sources? I'm genuinely curious.


What can we do better at GitLab?


For me, the real question is where have all the hackers gone? Years ago, there were high quality contributors here. They all had to go somewhere. When slashdot was dying, it was clear where everyone went (HN and Digg). This time around, it's not clear at all.


The culture changed.

Tech now mostly attracts (post)collegiate millennials chasing the startup wave (don't blame them, it's where there's chance of an actual job). You only have to look at the dwindling state of open-source right now to see proof of this. Add to that the post-Snowden cynicism that killed off what was left of cyber-utopianism and the free web, and it's that pretty clear that the hackers of yore grew up and weren't replaced by the next generation.


they just left. arguing with kids is boring


I wonder if that isn't the case. If that's true, that would be a shame, but I can't blame them.


I wish I knew, I would go there too.


> A perfect example of what I'm talking about.

It's certainly a perfect example that people see what they want to see, even when presented with overwhelming evidence to the contrary.

I'm talking about you, by the way.


Like facts?


Webdev has always been shit. Anybody remember xhtml? From the very beginning, everything the w3 standards body touches has been a design by committee nightmare. The latest generation is just more of the same.

That said, it's not going anywhere anytime soon. "Because it makes lives easier for developers" is not a valid reason for most end users to change their habits.

Personally, I'm banking on better tooling. Most single page webapps today are just more complicated versions of fancy UX on top of an excel spreadsheet. So why are there no graphical design tools that let you visually set up the application, visually see where the data comes from and where it goes and then spits out html, css and react code? The state of the art in code generation has come a long way since dreamweaver.


And the stored calories, like body fat and glycogen? What side of the equation are those on? And the energy needed to convert complex carbs and protein into glycogen? The energy used converting glycogen to ATP?

If you can demonstrate everywhere the energy comes from and everywhere it goes and where and how it's used in the body, I imagine there's a nobel prize in it for you. There's still a lot we don't know about where all that energy comes from and goes.


>And the stored calories, like body fat and glycogen? What side of the equation are those on?

Weight loss...

>And the energy needed to convert complex carbs and protein into glycogen?

Energy out...

>The energy used converting glycogen to ATP?

Energy out...

The body is complex. Energy in - energy out = weight lost its not.


Because carbs affect insulin. When your insulin is high, you store fat. When your insulin is low, you burn fat. It's that simple. Combine that with the fact we in the western world overconsume carbs because they're cheap and addictive and you get your answer.


Carbs make your insulin go up, but so does protein; a steak will cause substantially higher insulin secretion than pure white table sugar. What you really want to be eating is a high-carbohydrate, high-fiber diet (whole plant foods, lots of whole grains, beans, fruits, and vegetables).


Absolute nonsense. I don't suppose you have actual science to back up your quackery?


Well, since you've asked so politely!

An insulin index of foods: the insulin demand generated by 1000-kJ portion of common foods

http://ajcn.nutrition.org/content/66/5/1264.abstract


Lifting may be boring, but it's not time consuming. If you want to build muscle, you want to stick to high weight/low reps anyway. The benefits weight lifting gives you is enormous and extends well beyond just building muscle.


If you want to build _strength_ you'll do high weight/low reps. If you want primarily size, you need to have the volume (about 8 reps pre set for most exercises, and 3-5 sets), which could be pretty time consuming.


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

Search: