We're doing the same! The Lambda function also has an authentication layer, so we can protect user-uploaded assets.

Which professional solution do you prefer?

Im using Jenkins, which i know is controversial here, but it has been rock solid since years for me.

And there exist a lot of specialized solutions out there, where the business model is purely CI.

Buildkite is next level

Maoni0 is the mastermind behind the .NET GC. They won't judge you, and if they do, that's their problem.

Sure, but how many people truly know this? I love knowing about people who are key contributors to the industry. I run into a lot of walls when trying to talk to 99% of my coworkers about any of them.

I feel that if you are in the target audience for this article (deep dive into the behavior and design decisions of the .net GC) then you probably know who Maoni is.

I'm just a sometime mid-level .net dev, and I immediately recognized her name.

That's fair, I usually read these .NET articles that crop up here on HN, though I don't always recognize the names, and I am easily the target audience, but I know industry architects who probably do not know who the author is offhand.

Is there a 'prettier' equivalent for code formatting? In my opinion, it's the only thing missing for a truly scalable codebase.

CSharpier is pretty good for a prettier like feel: https://csharpier.com/

I currently somewhat wish CSharpier could also install (or modify, if we are wishing for ponies) an .editorconfig that matches its settings enough that someone with a habit of existing `dotnet format` or who hasn't yet installed CSharpier's own IDE extensions doesn't have a "bad time" or accidentally create a lot of commit churn.

Prettier was relatively easy to adopt because most styles at the time were just eslint configurations and auto-formatters were scarce before Prettier. .NET has a long history of auto-formatters and most of them speak .editorconfig, so some interop would be handy, even if the goal isn't "perfect" interop. Just enough to build a pit of success for someone's first or second PR in a project before they get to that part of the Readme that says "install this thing in VS or Rider" or actually start to pay attention to the Workspace-recommended extensions in VS Code.

dotnet format[0] with .editorconfig should do the job.

[0]: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/core/tools/dotnet-f...

Is there an equivalent to cursorrules and copilot-instructions for the Jetbrains IDEs (Rider) + GitHub Copilot extension?

I hope access to Code Review in GitHub will be available to paid users soon! It's going to be a game changer as a first level of code review before real people get involved with the PR.

I love to hear this as the PM for Copilot code review at GitHub!

We’re running a preview of the code review feature right now, and are looking forward to opening it to all paid subscribers soon.

If you’d like to try it sooner, I can hook you up - just email my HN username @github.com :)

I have just sent you an email. Thank you Tim!

How does it compare to BuildJet?

We're both offering managed GitHub Actions runners - some of the differences include:

- Depot runners are hosted in AWS us-east-1, which has implications for network speed, cache speed, access to internet services, etc. (BuildJet is hosted in Europe - maybe Hetzner?)

- Also thanks to AWS: each runner has a dedicated public IP address, so you're not sharing any third-party rate limits (e.g. Docker Hub) with other users

- We have an option to deploy the runners in your own AWS account or VPC-peer with your VPC

- We're integrating Actions runners with the acceleration tech we've built for container builds, starting with distributed caching

Yes, BuildJet runs from Hetzner - https://runs-on.com/reference/benchmarks-gha-providers/

GitHub has a colo presence in Frankfurt so pulling repos from Europe is quick.

Does anyone know of any books or resources that focus on the concept of a back-end application that allows you to stream video from A to Z in a performant way like Google Meet or Jitsi?

I find it exciting to have a tool that allows up to 100 participants at once right in the browser.

I don't think there is comprehensive information about that. We all do pretty much the same, implement the Selective Forwarding Unit (SFU) model.

The idea is the SFU will receive a number of streams for each user (usually up to 3, in low, mid and high resolutions) and then it will forward one of them to each other participant depending on things like available bandwidth, requested video size, etc.

There are a number of Open Source implementations available, in case you want to study it deeper:

- Jitsi videobridge: https://github.com/jitsi/jitsi-videobridge

- Janus: https://github.com/meetecho/janus-gateway

- mediasoup: https://github.com/versatica/mediasoup

- (p)ion: https://github.com/pion/ion-sfu

- meddoze: https://github.com/medooze/media-server-node

And probably more!

Jitsi was (is?) based on WebRTC. Usual challenges about conferencing is, beyond 2 members, having n*m bandwidth is bad, and a solution is to centralize the streams.

I'm sure that one day, most of the things we'll see or hear on the web will be filtered by this kind of software.

Not likely IMO, the arms race will continue.

Plus, are you sure you’re eager to sign up for even more censorship-by-opaque-algorithm?

I'm not eager, but I do think it's inevitable.

That said, there are some images I wish I'd never seen.

If I could be sure it was only being used for good (by my definition of the word), that would make me eager to install a magical perfect opaque filter algorithm.

But it won't be perfect, and it won't only be used for what I consider to be good.

Grooveshark.

Honestly Spotify is basically groveshark but with a fee

Totally agree. It was the best.