jarpineh

Intriguing concept, especially because I've thought of dabbling into this area.

Can this tool solve these problems with models:

- insisting on using sed and shell redirection instead of File Edit Tools?

- trying to use npx to run commands instead of npm run that's right there in package.json

- forgetting to produce the docs that was asked for in AGENTS.md

- checking and using latest package versions instead of deciding somehow that years old versions are good enough

To my mind these are context problems, where somehow model chooses other information it has over what's in the repository, and what tools it has on call.

The other side of Lat.md, checking diffs models make among other changes, that's hard for me to grasp. I'd need to see it in action. Perhaps a coding session as a stream?

Well, this looks very nice. I have so far avoided runbooks, preferring to use Ansible or such. Installed, and will see if I'll change my habits. Containers and such have made Ansible usage more cumbersome.

Also, I noticed there's only 60+ Atuin sponsors (at Github), so added myself. Been using Atuin for some while now. Hopefully their work is sustainable.

I wonder what is the difference between efficiency of MacBook display vs Framework laptop. Whilst CPU and GPU take considerable power they aren't usually working at 100% utilization. Display however has to be using power all the time, possibly at high brightness in daytime. MacBooks have (all?) high resolution displays which should be much power hungrier than Framework 13 IPS. Pro models use mini LED, which needs even more power.

I did ask LLM for some stats about this. According to Claude Sonnet 4 through VS Code (for what that's worth), my Macbook's display can consume same or even more power than CPU does for "office work". Yet my M1 Max 16" seems to last a good while longer than whatever it was I got from work this year. I'd like to know how those stats are produced (or are they hallucinated...). There doesn't seem to be a way to get display's power usage in M series Macs. So, you'd need to devise a testing regime for display off and display on 100% brightness to get some indication of its effect on power use.

I'm no health expert, only an expert practitioner of my hands. Mostly I keep changing keyboards and positions. That small chorded keyset can be set to more natural positions and moved at will to wherever you can reach. You ostensibly don't need to even look at it. I'd assume you would be looking between the chord sheet for directions and what you're actually writing... A device like this Tap thing, which is attached to your fingers or wrist, allows even more freedom.

As for mouse, well, I guess a trackball is easier to move about, stick to chair arm or something. Touchpad might work also, but you require more estate for precision and gestures.

Yeah, I have probably conflated the two technologies somewhere along the way. And if I had read all the way to the footnotes of the original article I'd have found the keyset's chords. They do are counting in straight binary, going from a-z in order. Add mouse buttons for modes to get uppercase, numbers and what not. Interesting really that such a simple scheme worked.

I sometimes wonder if chorded keyboard would be better for controlling the computer and keeping better posture against RSI issues. Not to mention more compact space compared to full keyboard. I seem to remember from a recording of the demo (and few writings on subject) that the keyset and mouse were used together for more powerful effect than either one alone.

What I haven't found out is how well a multilingual writer could use these. Do the chords rely on properties of particular language, like English. Does the chord order follow from how often you write letter a instead of x. Would another language be adaptable to same chords, or do you need to make an optimized version?

And since in Lisp code is data and data is code you could go even farther back. A tad sensationalist claim from the article authors.

I find it a baffling that the popularity of Jupyter and successes of notebook analysis in science hasn’t brought a change in Python to better support this user base. Packaging has (slowly) progressed and Uv nicely made the experience smooth, fast and above all coherent. Yet the Python runtime and parser are the same as ever. The ipynb notebook format and now Marimo’s decorator approach had to be invented on top. Python might never attain the heights of Lisp’s REPL driven development, yet I wonder if it couldn’t be better. As much I enjoy using Jupyter it’s always been something tacked on top of infrastructure that doesn’t want to accommodate it. Thus you need to take care of cell order yourself or learn to use a helper tool (Jupytext, Nbdev).

Me, I’d have support in the parser for a language structure or magic comment that points the cell boundaries. I would make dynamic execution of code a first party feature with history tracking and export of all the code sent into the runtime through this. Thus what the runtime saw happen could be committed over what user thought they did. Also, a better, notebook aware evaluation with extension hooks for different usage methods (interactive, scripting, testing).

I have no solution to ipynb JSON problem. I do think it is bad that our seemingly only solution for version control can manage only simple text, and users of all the other format have to adapt or suffer.

This is a wonderful project. Seemingly simple on the surface. I'd love to see some notes of the frontend implementation. I see there's OpenFreeMap as presumably the base map, which uses MBTiles. Then custom geometry on top from Pmtiles, that I assume is generated for the project. How the colormapping is done I didn't find yet. Actually lots to unpack here.

The nature of UI as an extension is somewhat hard to understand, since its installation method differs from other extensions. Even core ones. Some extensions autoload, some require INSTALL query, and this one has its own special builtin query. It at least feels more ingrained than other extensions by its user experience.

Then there's the (to me) entirely new feature of an extension providing a HTTP proxy for external web service. This part could have been more prominently explained.

Edit: the OP states that "built-in local UI for DuckDB" and "full-featured local web user interface is available out-of-the-box". These statements make me think this feature comes with the release binary, not that it's an extension.

To clarify my point: for me it's not the possible confusion of what this plugin does or how, but what this collaboration means for the future of DuckDB's no-cost and commercial usage.

I have thought that the commercial nature of the (heh) mother company here, DuckDB labs, is support contracts and the like. Whilst MotherDuck is just another VC funded company in the DuckDB ecosystem. This new extension being added the list of default extensions blurs the line. That it seemingly is a proxy to closed source product from another company makes things even murkier. I can see a point for a for-pay external extension, but this one feels more like an AD for other company's services.