yarn with zero-installs removes an awful lot of pain present in npm and pnpm. Its practically the whole point of yarn berry.
Firstly - with yarn pnp zero-installs, you don't have to run an `install` every time you switch branch, just in case a dep changed. So much dev time is wasted due to this.
Secondly - "it worked on my machine" is eliminated. CI and deploy use the exact same files - this is particularly important for deeply nested range satisfied dependencies.
Thirdly - packages committed to the repo allows for meaningful retrospectives and automated security reviews. When working in ops, packages changing is hell.
All of this is facilitated by the zip files that the comment you replied to was discussing, that you tangented away from.
The graph you have linked is fundamentally odd. Firstly - there is no good explanation of what it is actually showing. I've had claude spin on it and it reckons its npm download counts. This leads to it being a completely flawed graph! Yarn berry is typically installed either via corepack or bootstrapped via package.json and the system yarn binary. Yarn even saves itself into your repo. pnpm is never (I believe) bundled with the system node, wheras yarn and npm typically are.
Yes, my AirPod Pros do this too, and I've found that the issue is due to a problem with the external microphones which are involved in active noise cancelling. In order to fix the problem I had to disable ANC, and use them like a pair of basic wireless headphones, which has been quite disappointing. I've found that basically any instance of dropping the headphones on a solid floor, even while in the case, will result in this rattling sound occurring.
I had this exact problem on my AirPod pros too! It is the internal mic, but if you forcefully suck the air out from the black mesh microphone openings, it gets rid of it.
There’s some random form of someone out there who figured this out, so credit to them, but this fixed mine (I couldn’t bear transparency mode for the longest time lol)
I've been using the AirPods Max 1s for the last five years and you should get the Sony XM-6s. The Apple AirPod Max sound great, bur are heavy and fairly uncomfortable on the head when worn for more than an hour or two. Furthermore, I experienced persistent wireless connectivity problems and eventually sent them back to Apple under warranty. They were replaced successfully, but with a different pair of the same model which had a worn out headband. Overall it's been a bad experience and I wish that I purchased the Sony XM-6s insead.
The AI agent can run `echo $API_KEY` all it wants, but the value is only a placeholder which is useless outside the system, and only the proxy service which the agent cannot directly access, will replace the placeholder with the real value and return the result of the network call. Furthermore, the replacement will happen within the proxy service itself, it does not expose the replaced value to memory or files that the agent can access.
It's a bit like taking a prepaid voucher to a food truck window. The cashier receives the voucher, checks it against their list of valid vouchers, records that the voucher was used so they can be paid, and then gives you the food you ordered. You as the customer never get to see the exchange of money between the cashier and the payment system.
(Noting that, as stated in another thread, it only applies to headers, so the premise I raised doesn't apply either way)
Except that you are asking for the result of it, "Hey Bobby LLM, what is the value of X" will have Bobby LLM tell you the real value of X, because Bobby LLM has access to the real value because X is permissioned for the domain that the LLM is accessed through.
If the cashier turned their screen around to show me the exchange of money, then I would certainly see it.
This post [0] suggests that leadership at SparkFun has been engaged in a long term harassment campaign targeting the founder of AdaFruit (Limor Fried) using company resources, and is allegedly using their CoC as a smokescreen to cover up their own bad behavior and cast blame on the victim.
> sparkfun chose to publish a vague public accusation. once you do that, speculation is inevitable.
Ok sure, but the explanation provided strikes me as equally vague. I don't think anyone who isn't familiar with this situation has any idea what the hell is going on between these two orgs tbh.
If a dispassionate observer can't figure out situation without significant effort, then it's very easy to handwave this away as unimportant.
Personally I'd very much hate for that to happen here if something truly noteworthy happened.
The problem is once you get into concrete specifics, you enter the realm of legal liability and potential libel, so it's all posturing until their adrenaline runs out, then they'll either reconcile (or not) behind closed doors.
You know, I think you're right. I recant what I said earlier. I actually don't think I should care about this matter at all.
In a more general sense, it seems best to me that people should just mind their own business and settle things like adults without giving into this pervasive and strange desire to be vindicated by their framing of the situation to others.
There is literally no benefit to anyone but the storyteller. They are either seen as more or less virtuous by their framing of the situation.
They have an interest in telling you a story that makes them look good and a greater interest in downplaying their guilt in the matter. At the end of the day it means very little to most observers.
Pair that with the absolute disincentive to provide actual specifics, the whole thing is moot to an honest person.
My take away from this link is not what Adafruit probably wants.
> we told sparkfun they needed to get their house in order
> that was the big issue i wanted them to get some hr training on, or _something_
You don't tell or demand another company do something with their own employees. There's more professional ways of dealing with a situation like this.
Request a meeting. Send a calm, collected, professional email to a decision-maker and be sure it's well sourced and factual. Keep things in private.
If the other party decides not to take action, then make a decision if you want to continue doing business with them. Do not keep pressuring them for the outcome you want, do not escalate the situation, and certainly don't drag the dirty laundry out into the public.
Like, what good did Adafruit actually think was going to come from getting into a fight with the founder of Sparkfun? 50 lashings with a wet noodle?
Whatever Sparkfun allegedly did to cause this, Adafruit looks pretty poor in this light. I've been a long time customer of both Adafruit and Sparkfun, and will continue to be - but this is some rookie, amateur, hot-headed behavior from Adafruit.
> You don't tell or demand another company do something with their own employees.
Depends what they did. Let's check the forum post…
> they had created and promoted hate sites, photoshopped images, and harassment targeting limor, me, and others at adafruit. this was done on company time, shared, promoted.
Ok yeah if a company is sharing bigoted photoshops of my likeness, yes, I'm gonna demand that they discipline the responsible employees. Obviously.
I don't have any reference point for what "hate sites, photoshopped images, and harassment [meriting HR training]" constitute, but if it's anywhere near as bad as it sounds, sure, escalate the situation and air your dirty laundry in public. This is unacceptable behaviour, and apparently it went on for years. When you're being publicly harassed, you have no duty to indefinitely restrain your response to private, polite emails.
It sounds like the allegations are for things that was be illegal in nature.
I think the expected way to handle something like this would be to write the calm factual email. If that goes nowhere then sue them. I don't think the public airing approach is the right one.
Suing is way more expensive and way more hostile than simply airing your grievances in public. And why not? That's what public forums are for. "Do nothing" and "sue them" are not your only options; we are part of a society, not merely party to a legal system.
It’s difficult to prosecute online harassment, and “hate sites and photoshopped images” aren’t illegal. There’s a right to freedom of speech in the US.
They seem to have reported it in private and were then banned and publicly accused of Code of Conduct violations in retaliation. Going public with everything would seem to be the reasonable response.
Sure, but they did so by going to the Teensy forum, which is not a SparkFun site, and really made a stink. If going public is reasonable, they did it in the least reasonable way.
That’s not what I’m seeing.
They requested comments from the public about the product, only mentioning that the fact that they weren’t allowed to purchase more from Sparkfun [0]. Sparkfun then jumped into the discussion with accusations of a Code of Conduct violation, and only then did they respond publicly. Sparkfun made it public first in that 3rd party forum.
after a decade of dealing with the founder's bullying, i had enough, looking back almost every year there was something. we did handle things privately until it was clear nothing was going to change, the only real change is we cannot buy teensy, a closed source board sparkfun exclusively makes now, maybe they (sparkfun) will stop paying the payments on something that had to agreed to, and have, we'll see.
I understand you're pretty upset with the situation, and I can't blame you.
But I never should be reading about any of this on public forums. It doesn't reflect well on you or Adafruit.
Now an outcome has been chosen for you, without your input. The situation is probably irreconcilable.
That's not the position you ever want to be in. Obviously.
If the situation was untenable, after your reasonable and private attempts, you should have decided to sever ties on your terms. The outcome would have been the same, but you'd be in control of the situation, and wouldn't be permanently leaving things in public view.
I'm sorry for the situation. I'm a real hot head at times, but it's something I've learned (the hard way, over and over again) that I need to control. Business is business...
> Now an outcome has been chosen for you, without your input. The situation is probably irreconcilable.
I think you've reversed cause and effect. SparkFun publicly cut off Adafruit in response to Adafruit's private contact with SparkFun. Only then did Adafruit put out a public post addressing SparkFun's vague public allegations.
there was only one product we were purchasing anything in the hundreds of units, the teensy... we had a record sales today, inquires for a new board that is open source, so i think the community and customers have made decisions too.
The Teensy is so 2020 anyways. You want to skate where the puck is going.
You will want boards of the Kendryte K230 or SpacemitK3 (best value RISC-V chips) or Puya PY32 (best cheapest MCU, takes 5V!), and a STM32P1 linux board for good measure.
You must be misunderstanding: the public post you are linking is from the party you are not talking to, and was the first publicly published thing, which if I'm reading correctly, is the sin to you.
I completely disagree. Be yourself. And broadly, if you aspire to be in charge, as opposed to a forever IC, be yourself even more!
Adafruit makes an aesthetic experience that appeals to a niche audience. It is not an hockey stick growth company. And even those that are: Everybody makes aesthetic experiences. Nobody needs hobbyist microcontrollers.
Part of the product is being on the “right side” of Internet dramas.
If part of the product is "being on the right side of Internet drama", that kinda makes me trust them even less. A perverse incentive to get involved in stupid slapfights, escalate, and lie about it...
I don't mean to be rude but given that I've seen several public statements about this "situation" from Paul dating back to Nov, I think you're commenting on a less complete dataset than I am.
I see: when you’re working with another company and someone’s a dick, you can’t mention it and give constructive suggestions on how to fix it, because then the suggestions are transmutated into an order. That means you are telling a company what it has to do to stop the bad thing, which is worse than the bad thing.
> it has to do to stop the bad thing, which is worse than the bad thing
Imo that “worse than the bad thing” evaluation is highly subjective. Nevertheless, I have to say I agree with the poster who recommends you cut ties on your own terms.
The fact that the Adafruit team continued that thread unabashedly after Paul Stoffregen's first reply is an awful look in my opinion. Doesn't seem like anyone here is behaving like adults.
Edit: I should clarify - Paul seems very much like a mature adult in all of this.
Wow, and it gets worse from there. I think Paul is smart to let Phil drag him on his own forum rather than let him go blow up on social media for getting banned.
For context: This post by ptorrone suggests that leadership at Sparkfun has been engaged in a long running harassment campaign against the founder of AdaFruit (Limor Fried) and is now attempting to weaponize their CoC to cast blame on the victim in order to deflect from their own behavior[0].
for anyone still reading:
in july, we told sparkfun they needed to get their house in order. for years, sparkfun's leadership ignored specific behavior from leadership (and employees, now former... they had created and promoted hate sites, photoshopped images, and harassment targeting limor, me, and others at adafruit. this was done on company time, shared, promoted. this was reported to them. it was documented and ignored. that was the big issue i wanted them to get some hr training on, or _something_
months later in 2025, the same individual resurfaced and re-promoted it with what appears to be nate's blessing at the time. we again told sparkfun to deal with this. instead of addressing the behavior, sparkfun’s response was to “ban” adafruit from purchasing teensy by invoking a vague, secret set of rules that neither we nor paul (the creator of teensy) were allowed to see.
this is not a one-off. nate (the founder of sparkfun) has done this before. anyone who has worked with him long enough knows this is how conflict is handled: deflect, escalate, and try to punish rather than deal with the underlying conduct.
we do not respond to bullying by backing down. we never have. that is why we are here.
For additional context to the context, here's Nick's account of the so-called 'long running harassment campaign' [1]: Nick made a joke site about Phil back in 2017, Phil emailed asking him to stop, Nick immediately transferred the domain to him with a heartfelt apology ("man... I just wanna be friends. I wanna support
you and Limor and also feel good about the place that I work (and kinda
live). [...] These social tools don't always translate, for that I apologize."), and they wrapped up the exchange on good terms.
You could just run it in a Docker container and not think about it much after that. Mount a volume to the container with the directory contents you want to be available for edit by the agent.
[0] https://yarnpkg.com/advanced/pnp-spec#zip-access
reply