_______               __                   _______
       |   |   |.---.-..----.|  |--..-----..----. |    |  |.-----..--.--.--..-----.
       |       ||  _  ||  __||    < |  -__||   _| |       ||  -__||  |  |  ||__ --|
       |___|___||___._||____||__|__||_____||__|   |__|____||_____||________||_____|
                                                             on Gopher (inofficial)
 (HTM) Visit Hacker News on the Web
       
       
       COMMENT PAGE FOR:
 (HTM)   Ruby for Good
       
       
        ksajadi wrote 20 hours 49 min ago:
        I just want to say thank you for all your good work. We are very proud
        to have been a small part of your efforts at Cloud 66. Keep up the good
        work.
       
        pcthrowaway wrote 23 hours 22 min ago:
        I'm curious, what companies are sponsoring this Hackathon (if any)?
        It'd be good to know if there are any tech companies that legitimately
        stand for good in the world in 2026.
       
        seanmarcia wrote 23 hours 35 min ago:
        Hey all, I'm Sean, the founder of Ruby for Good!
        
        Excited to see this posted. We'd previously shared it in a few Slacks
        and were planning a larger announcement after the long weekend, but
        since someone beat us to it, we've opened up the early-bird
        registrations we were saving for Tuesday.
        
        The Ruby for Good in-person event is absolutely not a hackathon. It's a
        friendly gathering of OS maintainers where we work on existing projects
        (some have been running for over 10 years!) and kick off new ones. We
        don't code into the night and burn folks out, either. We have a hard
        stop every day when we break for dinner. The evenings are reserved for
        karaoke, conversations and s'more-making around the campfire, board
        games, and all the other fun nerdery that happens when you get a group
        of awesome folks together. Really, the best way to think of the event
        is as "nerd camp for good." Everyone leaves having made a bunch of new
        close friends.
        
        That's partly because helping non-profits is only part of the RfG
        mission. The other parts are growing the tech community and helping
        folks level up, regardless of skill level.
        
        For people interested in attending this year: we'll be working on
        existing projects as well as kicking off several new ones. With ACA
        subsidies going away and the number of nonprofits reaching out to us,
        our focus area this year is healthcare. We'll be launching a project
        with an Ohio/Illinois nonprofit that works with pediatric cancer
        patients and their families, another in Virginia that works with cancer
        caregivers, and a Maryland nonprofit focused on mental health.
        
        If you can't make it, almost all our projects are on GitHub and run
        year-round, so feel free to grab an issue!
       
        matthewpick wrote 1 day ago:
        Hackathons can be a blast. That said, it usually takes extra effort to
        productionize-a-thing after the initial hackathon effort.
        
        Hope to see a follow-up post on what was built!
       
        shevy-java wrote 1 day ago:
        > an annual event happening this year in the Washington DC area where
        programmers from all over the globe get together over a long weekend to
        build and contribute to projects that help our communities
        
        Or, just write code for a project - and add useful documentation to it.
        This is probably more relevant than overpriced hackathons.
       
        coolThingsFirst wrote 1 day ago:
        Why does Ruby still have this artisinal aura to it, never seen C/C++
        For Good gathering.
       
          swat535 wrote 23 hours 43 min ago:
          Well, Ruby was designed by Matz who is a native Japanese, so it
          encompasses lot of the Japanese ideals of perfection and beauty.
          
          It's no accident that it's named after one of the rarest gems in
          nature. This philosophy of craft and beauty is thus instilled within
          the community and gets carried forward.
       
          michaelteter wrote 1 day ago:
          I can't answer for others, but IMO, Ruby is the most elegant and
          expressive general purpose programming language that has reached a
          significant level of maturity and large audience.
          
          If you write Ruby for a few years, and then you "go back" to other
          languages, you will groan.  That's not to say that some other
          languages do not have things that we wish Ruby had, but often those
          other things would not really fit well with Ruby.
          
          Nothing is perfect from every angle.  But writing Ruby can be a joy
          for some of us.
       
            TeriyakiBomb wrote 22 hours 31 min ago:
            There's a huge amount of wonderful people in the community too.
       
              youngNed wrote 21 hours 3 min ago:
              There are. But also.. so much drama. Like soooo much drama
              
              I'm going to edit this: much of this is rails,    we know why that
              is,  so apologies to rubyists
       
          gobdovan wrote 1 day ago:
          I think it's the community. As an outsider watching a friend who is
          deeply involved with the Ruby ecosystem, I am in awe of the support
          they get even for small, artisanal-seeming projects from other devs
          in the community. I've seen them become a better a developer simply
          by showing up to conferences, talking to other maintainers and
          participating in the community.
       
          shevy-java wrote 1 day ago:
          I would not know, but I also do not think that an event xyz in one
          place at time, reflects all of a community either. So I could not
          tell you what the people there do; probably they want to socialize. I
          think creating and maintaining high quality project would be much
          more important but maybe that's just me. All the main drivers in
          ruby, have been written ages ago really - rails, _why the lucky
          stiff, even the old "Learn to program" tutorial from Chris Pine and
          so forth. That is not to say that no innovation has happened since
          then, of course, but it seems the peak days are really far, far
          behind now ...
          
          Ruby is still a great programming language, but it really needs to
          intensify the effort to get out of the pit-of-decline.
       
            isityettime wrote 1 day ago:
            > Ruby is still a great programming language, but it really needs
            to intensify the effort to get out of the pit-of-decline.
            
            The languages that have supplanted it haven't succeeded by being
            excellent. If excellence won't do it, what should "Ruby" do?
       
              coolThingsFirst wrote 21 hours 55 min ago:
              I wonder if Google was the X factor why Python edged out Ruby.
       
              TeriyakiBomb wrote 22 hours 27 min ago:
              We've gotten to a point now where ultimately there needs to be a
              very short elevator pitch for any language to gain any traction
              at all. Anything longer than a sentence, it generally won't go
              far relatively speaking. It's like a calcification/maturity thing
              in big sectors of software engineering. You need a VERY good
              reason to upset an incumbent. "Because we know it/because
              everyone uses it" is a powerful motivator.
       
                runevault wrote 19 hours 52 min ago:
                Elevator pitch for the language itself or a library/library
                ecosystem that lets you do things better than in other
                languages. Ruby originally blew up because Rails was a way
                people enjoyed writing backend code, despite the speed issues.
                But the problem is other languages got good enough at writing
                back ends Ruby was no longer special there and didn't have
                anything else to back it up the way Python has such strong
                control of the ML library ecosystem.
       
                isityettime wrote 21 hours 36 min ago:
                > "Because we know it/because everyone uses it" is a powerful
                motivator.
                
                It's fundamentally a "we want workers to be interchangeable
                cogs" motivator; it's a deprofessionalizing move that's against
                the interests of all programmers per se. Managers can repeat
                it, but there's no good reason for developers to do anything
                but resist it where we can.
                
                The other side of this for developers is that the places where
                "everyone knows X" precludes all non-X options are actually
                signaling loudly that they don't much value developer autonomy.
                That's a useful signal worth attending to when applying for
                jobs.
       
              michaelteter wrote 1 day ago:
              At this point, we should just appreciate Ruby and move on.  In
              the AI age, other languages are better choices.  Ruby is my
              favorite language, but I build with Go now.  Or rather, I guide
              my minions to build with Go.  They write Go better than they
              would write Ruby (or Python... please die, Python).
       
                insensible wrote 22 hours 43 min ago:
                Ruby is a great utility language target for LLM-generated
                tools.
       
        deedubaya wrote 1 day ago:
        I’m glad to see conferences like this exist. It creates dedicated
        space for these focuses and the people who care passionately about
        them.
       
        dyeje wrote 1 day ago:
        I volunteered a few years ago and had a great experience.
       
        rdevilla wrote 1 day ago:
        The only programming language I know of that is obsessed with
        trumpeting its own moral virtue. "Matz is nice so we are nice," "Ruby
        for good," dragging DHH, etc.
        
        Meanwhile the Ruby Central and whytheluckystiff debacles show it to be
        anything but.
       
          the_gastropod wrote 1 day ago:
          Dude, what? Is it the MINASWAN acronym that's the problem or? If
          that's "trumpeting moral virtue", I can think of lots of programming
          languages that trumpet their moral virtue:
          
          Let's check out the Rust Code of Conduct ( [1] ):
          
          "Please be kind and courteous. There’s no need to be mean or rude."
          
          "We are committed to providing a friendly, safe and welcoming
          environment for all, regardless of level of experience, gender
          identity and expression, sexual orientation, disability, personal
          appearance, body size, race, ethnicity, age, religion, nationality,
          or other similar characteristic."
          
          Seems pretty morally virtuous, no?
          
          How 'bout Gleam... Right on their home page ( [2] ):
          
          "As a community, we want to be friendly too. People from around the
          world, of all backgrounds, genders, and experience levels are welcome
          and respected equally. See our community code of conduct for more.
          
          Black lives matter. Trans rights are human rights. No nazi bullsh*t."
          
          Seems morally virtuous, too!
          
          Also also: what does the "whytheluckystiff debacle" have to do with
          any of this?! Also also also: _why was pretty much the first
          prominent "dragger" of dhh. Man was an innovator.
          
 (HTM)    [1]: https://rust-lang.org/policies/code-of-conduct/
 (HTM)    [2]: https://gleam.run
       
            okeuro49 wrote 1 day ago:
            The CoC reminds me a lot of this quote by Sowell:
            
            "...if the answer to the problem is that people should just be
            virtuous, then there is no problem, because we have known that for
            thousands of years."
       
          jnovek wrote 1 day ago:
          _why’s disappearance from the scene was 17 years ago at this point.
          I don’t think the Ruby community you’re talking about exists
          anymore.
       
            rhgraysonii wrote 20 hours 27 min ago:
            I wonder what he is up to. I have 2 _why inspired tattoos after he
            did so much to influence my entire philosophy and style of
            programming. What a unique character, who happened to pop up at a
            very formative time for me. Thanks for all the nice stuff and
            ideas, _why.
       
              the_gastropod wrote 18 hours 0 min ago:
              That question pops into my mind from time to time, too. Hope he's
              well, and I hope he knows the lasting positive impact he had on
              so many people.
              
              I weirdly got my first programming job / made a good friend
              because of him (he tweeted about wishing he could adopt @person.
              I looked up @person, saw they lived in my city, worked at a
              company that was hiring. I DM'd @person, and eventually got the
              job!" Thanks ~2008 _why!
       
        block_dagger wrote 1 day ago:
        I love Ruby and have built my career on it, but is it the right
        language to be starting new projects with given agentic coding? My take
        is "no." Rust or TS are probably better choices right now.
       
          tjpnz wrote 15 hours 16 min ago:
          Agentic coding is not a given anywhere.
       
          vidarh wrote 1 day ago:
          Agents handle Ruby just fine. I used to have to give them some stern
          rules about avoiding instance_variable_get etc. instead of adding
          accessors, but those problems have pretty much vanished in the last 6
          months.
          
          I like using Ruby with agents because the code remains short and
          readable.
       
          compumike wrote 1 day ago:
          You can cheaply and readably give a lot of clues to both agents and
          humans with some assertions at the start of a method:
          
            raise ArgumentError.new("...") unless ...
          
          which can include type assertions but also a lot more. The agents
          seem to do well with this.
          
          I've also had good results using agents to write Crystal [1] which is
          Ruby-like but does have the static types and produces blazing fast
          static binaries. Might be a sweet spot for coding agents if you're
          building some backend services. But I'd still pick Ruby on Rails for
          a new full stack project.
          
 (HTM)    [1]: https://crystal-lang.org/
       
          jazzyjackson wrote 1 day ago:
          I’m downvoting because this is basically bait without any
          contribution as to why you feel that way, but personally I vibe coded
          a very successful result by iterating a rails app and then crawling
          the entire site into static files (~144,000 product pages and
          category pages) and then stashing them all in a bucket on cloudflare
          free tier.
          
          I never wrote ruby before so I could only sanity check the results
          and approach of what it was doing, but thanks to the automated data
          migrations it was very easy for me to change my mind about how I
          wanted data to be structured, rollback if it didn’t work etc. it is
          a language designed for rapid iteration.
       
          graboid wrote 1 day ago:
          I feel for a smallish project I'd rather prefer to have more
          readable, dense code like Ruby's over the ceremony of static types.
       
            QuantumNomad_ wrote 1 day ago:
            There is almost no ceremony involved in dealing with types in Rust.
            
            And what little there is, is worth it ten-fold for all of the
            runtime bug headaches that you avoid compared to dynamically typed
            languages.
       
              wasmperson wrote 18 hours 58 min ago:
              Specifically addressing the "almost no ceremony" claim and not
              the "totally worth it" claim:
              
              JS:
              
                let person_1 = { };
                let person_2 = { parent: person_1 };
                person_1.child = person_2;
              
              Rust:
              
                use std::cell::Cell;
                struct Person<'a> {
                    parent: Option<&'a Person<'a>>,
                    child: Cell>>
                }
              
                let person_1 = Person {
                    parent: None,
                    child: Cell::new(None)
                };
                  
                let person_2 = Person {
                    parent: Some(&person_1),
                    child: Cell::new(None)
                };
                  
                person_1.child.set(Some(&person_2));
              
              And that's before we start talking about function signatures and
              traits.
       
          m12k wrote 1 day ago:
          The typescript team themselves rewrote the compiler in Go to get
          better use of coding agents.
       
            franz899 wrote 1 day ago:
            They did it for speed, and Go was the language with the closest
            syntax to migrate to.
       
            hoten wrote 1 day ago:
            They started that migration years ago. I don't remember them citing
            agentic coding as a reason. Do you have a source?
       
              lexoj wrote 1 day ago:
              Not sure about the compiler but prominent users of llm agents
              (Mitchel Hashimoto, Armin Ronacher etc) has mentioned that Go
              gives better results for agentic coding.
       
          blacksmith_tb wrote 1 day ago:
          That seems like it would depend quite a bit on the project? I would
          think many nonprofits would want a webapp of some flavor, and Ruby
          (or Python) are still not bad choices there - my experience with
          Claude is that it handles Ruby well.
       
          lfx wrote 1 day ago:
          I understand why rust, but why TS? just for a front end?
       
            mdavidn wrote 1 day ago:
            Compiler errors help the chatbot find and fix problems. The
            equivalent in Ruby, RBS, isn't as widely adopted. Type annotations
            being in separate files is also inconvenient.
            
 (HTM)      [1]: https://github.com/ruby/rbs
       
          BirAdam wrote 1 day ago:
          Why go halfway with Rust when you could just pick Ada SPARK? Seems
          like an arbitrary choice based off of rationalizing a trend.
       
            pelagicAustral wrote 1 day ago:
            I feel like your comment is a bit tongue in cheek and i am going to
            take it at face value, but I honestly been feeling increasingly
            more like doing verbatim what you're suggesting and i dont have a
            very solid justification for it.
       
              BirAdam wrote 1 day ago:
              I meant it honestly. What excuse do people have to choose
              anything other than mission critical technologies if the AI
              system can do most of the heavy lifting? Why should we settle for
              anything less than five 9s of uptime?
       
            firesteelrain wrote 1 day ago:
            Because you pick Ada Spark if are in a certification heavy
            environment like Aerospace.
       
        aaronbrethorst wrote 1 day ago:
        The actual Ruby for Good website has more information:
        
 (HTM)  [1]: https://rubyforgood.org/
       
          ramon156 wrote 23 hours 52 min ago:
          Sadly Ai generated. Bummer.
       
            geoffpado wrote 22 hours 49 min ago:
            No signs of being AI-generated, and considering several parts of
            the [codebase of the website]( [1] ) haven't been touched since
            before ChatGPT was released, I think you might be barking up the
            wrong tree.
            
 (HTM)      [1]: https://github.com/rubyforgood/rubyforgood.org
       
              F3nd0 wrote 22 hours 27 min ago:
              The apparent founder has replied by saying they ‘just updated
              today with AI’, but the comment seems to have been deleted
              since. Not sure whether it was supposed to be serious or ironic.
              Maybe the latter, since the last commit is two months old. Or
              maybe the repository hasn’t been updated yet.
       
                seanmarcia wrote 22 hours 12 min ago:
                Yes, I did comment, sorry for the confusion. And the person who
                made the comment isn't crazy. We have another branch,
                claude_design, that was deployed briefly for some folks to look
                at and review and when he looked at the site it was the brief
                window that it was deployed. On the off chance that you have a
                better design sense than claude, love feedback/help on the new
                design -- and a PR ;)
       
                  someguyiguess wrote 19 hours 2 min ago:
                  Actually looking at it on mobile I see a few issues. Scroll
                  on mobile interferes with the slider. Also some of the font
                  sizes are too large and overflow. Is the source repository
                  public? Or was the request for a PR hyperbole?
                  
                  Edit: I see it was posted a few comments up.
       
                  someguyiguess wrote 19 hours 5 min ago:
                  Honestly Claude is not great at front end design. So it’s
                  more than an “off chance”. That being said I think the
                  site looks fine.
       
                    ValentineC wrote 11 hours 55 min ago:
                    Opus 4.6 and 4.7 can probably come up with something better
                    than most open source contributors, given a few iterations.
                    
                    We should figure out how to get more designers contributing
                    to open source.
       
       
 (DIR) <- back to front page