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

It seems I need to leave this running for it to work? So it's not just a configuration changes.

When you first launch it, you'll notice a pop-up saying that this will automatically run when you login. There's no dock icon or menu bar icon. So no configuration changes needed.

Interesting, there's always been a menu bar icon for it for me. You can hide it, though.

I'm using "Music Decoy" and I don't see one. Possible noTunes has one.

Ah, yeah. I'm using noTunes.

I guess you mean it runs automatically at Mac user login, so that it is running all the time.

I think you’re referring to the short term impacts of AI and he’s thinking more long-term.

Also, AI, even short term, is going to make some people and some countries extremely wealthy, so maybe this isn’t such a bad time to be thinking about those who are still extremely poor and who won’t benefit.


I can't believe that readers of HN actually think that that is how it does or should work.

Google/GCP can only make very general statements and in this case we want more than that.

They need to tell Railway and Railway needs to tell us, or Railway can tell us that Google is refusing to tell them.

Either way, we need to hear about this from Railway.


It's entirely plausible Google won't tell Railway without an NDA to prevent them disclosing exactly what set it all off.

The bigger point though is Google really need to flag any business account as not subject to these suspensions until checked into by several humans. Back when I had a team that used a lot of App Engine they would even call us when we caused all their pagers to go off, and then conspire to keep the lights on while things got fixed. It's sad they have ended up like this.


> It's entirely plausible Google won't tell Railway without an NDA to prevent them disclosing exactly what set it all off.

That case is called:

> or Railway can tell us that Google is refusing to tell them.

I'm not paying you (which let's face it, that's what an NDA is) just to find out why you messed up about as severely as one can imagine. In theory, there was a contract here: $ for cloud services, and the rug got pulled. One should get a very clear, and very apologetic explanation as to why, with no strings attached, or one should be voting with their wallet.

Now, whether Railway will do any of that, who knows.


They did:

"We take full responsibility for the architectural decisions that allowed a single upstream provider action to cascade into a platform-wide outage, and detail below what happened, how we recovered, and the changes we are making to prevent this from happening again."

My guess is they will be switching away from Google Cloud. Because anything else would be nuts.


I know hating GCP is hip, but why do only a minority entertains the possibility that Railway did really something off to trigger some alarms?

The calibration of the alarms might be off, and that's acceptable, but in the end if something can be held wrong, somebody will hold it wrong.

I did the same thing in the past, albeit in a much smaller scale. There's no shame in being wrong and admitting as long as it results in progress, so this stance of "we do nothing wrong" from both parties is getting a bit old now.


Of course it doesn’t work this way but why shouldn’t it? It doesn’t because Google is a massive company and could kill dozens of Railways before they notice an issue to their bottom line. However in a world where companies care I’d expect them to make a statement.


I took this a different way which was that to google railway is their customer and out of a variety of professional and security considerations want the communications to come from their customer and not them.


I think there’s been far too many Google/GCP ‘suspensions with no human in the loop’ that Google does need to put out a statement about their practices.


The only way is for PR to think they should open this


Google fucked up. They should convince people that it won't happen again.


They can't - that would violate the privacy rights of their customer.

They need to tell Railway and Railway needs to tell us, or Railway can tell us that Google is refusing to tell them.

Either way, we need to hear about this from Railway.


I think we know how this goes ...

Administration officials will insist that this will be bipartisan and just for national security.

Trump will then just come out and say it: that they won't authorize models that provide "fake news" such as him not winning the election by the most votes ever.

There will be a big fuss as people and media point to this as the smoking gun, but then it will turn out that American voters just don't care.

I guess we could learn to appreciate Mistral sooner than expected.


Having it in the hands of public companies or foundations seems preferable to me to having it in the hands of private companies or individuals.


This sounds great, except for one thing: you can scale your compute (CPU & RAM) as needed but your storage appears to scale with it.

So, if I use a "16 vCPUs, 32GB RAM, 400GB SSD" machine for a period of intense compute, and then want to scale that down to "2 vCPUs, 4GB RAM", most of my storage disappears?

That rather ruins the potential of the advertised scalability.


The scalability is in the number of instances: create, duplicate and destroy down to zero. Each instance size is fixed.


Joplin looks great, and is open source, but it appears to have one problem: the primary data store is SQLite, not files, and in this AI infected era having plain text files on the local filesystem is really important.

So if I am correct the "cloud drive as the storage" option is syncing with a the local SQLite db and to get local files one would need to be syncing the local db with both the cloud drive and the local filesystem.

With Obsidian I sync from local files direct to a cloud drive.


That would be great! Please do.


Can your service scale ram? like the way docker desktop does. Manual is fine.


yep you can choose ram + disk + cpu size


? You say 'yes' but you seem to be answering a different question. Docker desktop only makes me choose a max ram - it dynamically scales RAM usage. I don't need fully automatic like that, but the ability to vertically scale RAM for an existing instance is really important, particularly given the cost of RAM these days.


Ah we cannot do this without a restart. Hot pluggable ram is something I'm interested in but is currently a backburner feature.


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

Search: