Erm, thats Posthaven Inc. to you and me. I.e. a private company. They could change their terms, they could go out of business, they could be bought by Google who would proceed to kill off the service etc etc
The only correct answer to the question is (a) legal deposit with a national library (many take e-deposits these days, so you might not have to print it) or (b) print it on good paper or write it on a good cd and hope for the best
There is of course the silent other half of your question … does anyone really care about your accumulated life history that much ? sure your immediate family might, for a while, but one the bereavement period is over ?
They're both great for small, highly-focused features.
But when you have complex code or a very long module, yes, Claude 3.5 performs a lot better.
ChatGPT is much more likely to miss small, but important details that can break the code in unexpected ways. And even when you point out the error to ChatGPT, it will double down on being confident in its solution and output exactly the same code again.
I've got to think Claude 3.5 had much better training data and training methodologies for code because it's much "smarter" at being logical and fitting pieces together into one coherent whole. For any random task, I'd trust Claude at coding 20-30% more than ChatGPT.
- Find any cool tool online, download it, use it locally. Your data is persisted to your own local machine and your own personal cloud.
- Visit any website, download it as your own, modify it. Host it as your own and continue to add to it online.
- Browser vendors implement user accounts & hosting into the browser, so anyone can make a working app locally with a little bit of HTML and serve it to the whole internet with the press of a button.
- If your app takes off and goes viral, part of the economic value provided flows back to you through micropayments.
Basically: portable HTML "objects" that can be treated as mutable apps instead of only static documents = like GitHub + Codepen + Vercel + NoCode in one neat little package.
The first two points are foundational design principles for Decker[1], a programming environment which can be used as a local application or as a single-file self-contained web page which still retains all the development tools. The same is true for TiddlyWiki[2].
The web ecosystem already provides the substrate necessary to realize these visions, it's a matter of building things with a particular perspective in mind; a rejection of centralized infrastructure which is in many cases simply not needed.
That doesn't seem all that different from netscape and how it included a wysiwyg editor.
Obviously this is much harder given how much more server side the modern internet is. But i think the more fundamental problem is that 99% of users dudn't want this in the past and still dont really want this.
Micropayments is still not a thing yet. I think that if it were it would give rise to a lot of interesting movements like this one, organically more or less. The problem with open source and giving away things free is that people just take without giving back.
If you're planning to cancel, here's how to avoid the 50% cancellation fee:
1. Go to cancel your subscription. You will see a screen with the cancellation fee. Continue.
2. They will offer you a new plan to avoid the cancellation fee. Choose the cheapest one to switch to a new plan.
3. Here's the loophole: You can cancel any plan for free within two weeks. Cancel the new plan within this period and get your money back for the first month of the new plan.
I don't understand how it's legal for a company to materially change their terms of service, but not allow you to cancel out of the contract if you disagree.
In europe, afair, whenever a contract is changed to be worse for a party, that party has the right to cancel it right then and there without additional fees.
It's definitely the case in Germany for all insurances, electricity and other utilities, etc - they have long cancellation periods, but if the contract changes to your detriment (usually any sort of price increase), you're allowed to cancel immediately. It's even required that they remind you of that right in the same notification as the price increase.
In Europe companies are obligated to intercept and scan images anyway, so you can't escape Adobe's new spyware terms by switching vendors; they'll all have the same ToS provision.
Are you talking about possible future regulations that have not yet come into force? Are you aware that many drafts are very unrealistic and will never come into force?
> Can I ask you to ask things more civilly please? HN is not a classless insult place like Reddit.
Please, I completely responded in your tone. Also, there was no personal attack, I merely called out that what you wrote was not correct.
Yes, trending. First, you don't refer to that, Secondly, as my sibling say, this is not in effect.
All in all, your comment was indeed ignorant and did not even make a note to support why you would say that. I would also ask you to please keep that commentary on reddit.
Edit: seems like I am not the only one who thinks you comment is indeed classless given the other answers and the very gray text color.
And lastly, please don't abuse the flagging system.
This is just a draft though, right? Not actual legislation. So while still worrying, I think your post was inaccurate - it may be the case in the future, if things go poorly. But it isn't the case right now.
Terms of service are full of terms that aren't legal in many jurisdiction, they're written brodadly and assuming that any ambiguity is in favor of the company so that they have the best possible position to argue from if anything has to be decided in court or arbitration.
The same is true in the US. The catch, of course, is that you’d have to sue if they don’t let you out, and most people don’t have the time, will, or means to do that.
Yep, so after a few years of litigation and hours of time filling out forms on your state’s awful judicial portal (hopefully correctly!) you might stand a chance at a judgement. Then you can spend more time going back to court when they don’t pay, talking about time payment plans, etc. Maybe they’ll pay some of it, maybe not. Then they move to another state and you need to get your judgement domesticated there (with an in-person visit). Also, remember to keep renewing that judgement or it goes bye-bye!
Remember that the goal of the defendant is to exhaust the plaintiff, and cause them to spend more time than the judgement is worth. This is how the small claims system works.
> Yep, so after a few years of litigation and hours of time filling out forms on your state’s awful judicial portal (hopefully correctly!) you might stand a chance at a judgement
Do you have any examples of states where it takes hours of filling out forms for a small claims case?
The ones I've seen have been pretty simple.
California asks for plaintiff contact information, defendant contact information, how much money plaintiff is asking for and why the plaintiff believes they are owed that, the date that happened and how they calculated the amount, whether or not you've asked the defendant to pay you, a multiple choice question on which geographical aspect of the case takes place within the territory covered by the particular courthouse where you are filing, the zip code of the place that aspect of the case took place if you know it, whether or not the case is about an attorney-client fee dispute, if you are suing a public entity, if you've files more than 12 other small claims with the last 12 months in California, and if you claim is for more than $2500 and if is if you understand that you cannot file more than two small claims above $2500 in a single year.
California's is one of the more involved ones that I've seen.
Washington is pretty just much name the parties, how much you think you are owed, what it is owed for (checklist with categories like faulty workmanship, merchandise, rent, property damage, and a line to write in something else), and explanation of the reason for the claim.
It is. And someone will certainly make it happen. But most people don’t even know where their local small claims courts are, much less how to make a case, and lawyers cost money, and that is where most people end the conversation.
Yes, you can represent yourself and win, but it’s a lot of time, effort, and money (because time is money).
Someone will do this, and it will be great precedent. But most people will simply accept it because they don’t have the time or means.
Avoid class action and take them to small claims court or simply backcharge them and let your credit card handle it. Either way, they lose a lot more than a class action that will take years and get you nothing.
Imagine how much revenue Adobe must make from cancellation fees from people who don't discover this loophole. Quietly charging people to leave a subscription while a perfectly working (if ridiculous) workaround exists is a perfect example of an unethical business practice that exploits the incomplete information of customers.
I don't know where I'm going with this. Just had to reflect on how we all agree to denominate value into these fake but useful units of dollars, only for transactions like cancellation fees to be so far removed from the generation of actual, tangible _value_ that it all starts to feel like beta-testing a computer game.
From what I read somewhere it's because the cheaper plan where you pay by the month is actually an annual plan where you pay in installments. So technically speaking you're not paying a monthly subscription, you're paying off a debt that you took on when you got the annual subscription.
I wish I knew this when I accidentally let my photoshop trial continue and had to pay to cancel. What a horrible business practice, I really wish the worst for them.
This is how I avoid hotel cancellation fees. Simply call and ask the reservation to be moved forward outside of the cancellation penalty window, and then cancel.
I was hopelessly confused about what Soupault actually does, so I took time to understand it piece by piece and summarize it here:
1. HTML Manipulation: Unlike most SSGs that primarily generate HTML from templates and markdown, Soupault allows direct manipulation of HTML content, treating HTML as a mutable object rather than a final output.
2. External Tools Integration: Soupault automates the use of external tools for content processing and HTML modifications at build time, facilitating an array of content transformations directly on the HTML.
3. Metadata Handling: Soupault extracts metadata directly from HTML using CSS selectors, avoiding the need for front matter and offering more flexibility in content structure and metadata management.
TLDR: Basically, Soupault is a static site generator that allows for direct HTML manipulation of your sites by treating HTML as the source of truth instead of the final output.
I've always thought there should be a modern, lightweight jQuery alternative like this. Well done! I love the syntax and have been implementing something similar (although with inline events and more than just the standard array methods). [0]
Do you have an article/screencast on how the locality of behavior is implemented in both surreal and its companion project css-scope-inline? I'd love to understand it so I can maintain it longterm and add it to my own projects.
I'd love to talk with you about your philosophy of the web. I think we could sync up about some things!
Yes, thank you! Zepto is great and it's nice it's jQuery compatible. I've used it before and liked it.
However, I guess I was thinking something a bit more modern -- adding more advanced functionality than what jQuery has. Like more array methods for elements (e.g. `pluck` elements based on property values), reactive data stores/templating, a mutation observer helper.
If you pay $5/month for 1 year, your posts will be archived forever.
> If we can't charge your card, your site goes into read only mode. Even if something catastrophic happens, your content will remain online.
[0] https://posthaven.com/pricing