klauserc

Just being able to ping a location on screen is super helpful, otherwise: "Can you open the debug panel please. It's the bug icon in the lower left. No, three icons above that. No you just went past it."

Sharing multiple windows and allowing others to arrange them as the please is also much more productive. Otherwise: "Can we check the app. No not the live app, the local instance"

An alternative way to "forget" a value is to hand it off to another thread that then loops infinitely.

Could of course be plugged by saying `!Forget : !Send`, but wouldn't that preclude legitimate useful scenarios for `!Forget`?

Was my first thought as well, but this is an open weights model. You can run it on your own hardware.

I definitely am. Haven't touched git in over a year. If there was just a single feature to point at where jj meaningfully improves on git, I think it's: `jj undo`.

It is a universal undo command. It works for every change in your repository. You don't need to memorize/google/ask claude how to revert each individual kind of operation (commit, rebase, delete branch, etc.). You try a jj command, look at your repo, and if you don't like what you see, you `jj undo`.

The biggest downside for me is that no longer have the necessary expertise to help coworkers who get themselves into trouble with git.

jj automatically hides "uninteresting" changes. Most of the time, this is good.

Occasionally, I need to see more changes. It is not obvious to me how I get jj to show me elided changes. I mean, sure, I can explicitly ask jj to show me the one ancestor of the last visible change, and then show me the ancestor of that one, etc. Is some flag to say: "just show me 15 more changes that you would otherwise elide"?

Isn't that example the exact opposite of mixing content and presentation? The * notation applies the strong [emphasis] tag, the show rule (re-)defines the presentation. Ideally you would of course separate the two into separate files (template + content).

In my time using Typst, I found that Typst makes it possible/easy to make content even more abstract: write the content as a "data structure" and then present parts of it in various places around your document. For instance to list quantity/weight of a parts description in a parts index at the end.

Was using vim for a decade, discovered Helix, installed it on all my systems and haven't looked back (at least not voluntarily; I'm always bewildered by the old-school CAD-like command-then-subject paradigm when I get thrown into vi on a random machine)

Yes! One of the worst bugs to debug in my entire career boiled down to a piece of Java mutating a HashSet that it received from another component. That other component had independently made the decision to cache these HashSet instances. Boom! Spooky failure scenarios where requests only start to fail if you previously made an unrelated request that happened to mutate the cached object.

This is an example where ownership semantics would have prevented that bug. (references to the cached HashSets could have only been handed out as shared/immutable references; the mutation of the cached HashSet could not have happened).

The ownership model is about much more than just memory safety. This is why I tell people: spending a weekend to learn rust will make you a better programmer in any language (because you will start thinking about proper ownership even in GC-ed languages).

Using gen AI for anything artistic (illustrations, music, video, creative writing) is a dead end. The results are soulless and bland. People notice immediately.

Code completions are fine. Driving code through chat is a complete waste of time (never saves time for me; always ends up taking longer). Agentic coding (where the LLM works autonomously for half an hour) still holds some promise, but my employer isn't ready for that.

Research/queries only for very low stakes/established things (e.g., how do I achieve X in git).

I found Helix much easier to get into than vim because you can see and experiment with the selection before committing to an action. It's also much more familiar to users of modern software (where you generally first select an object and then apply an action).

Yes, all the time. For reference-level information, I don't trust AI summaries. If I need to know facts, I cannot have even the possibility of a lying auto-complete machine between me and the facts.

Exploratory/introductory/surface-level queries are the ones that get handed to auto-complete.

I like how Kagi lets me control whether AI should be involved by adding or omitting a question mark from my search query. Best of both worlds.

As someone responsible for login/registration at a large online retailer, I see so much bot traffic and attacks. Attackers try to enumerate registered users, try to mass-login with credentials from password dumps, try to register accounts controlled by bots.

Login forms are a war zone. Looking for patterns that indicate the other party is a bot and serve them (and only them) a captcha is a technique that is quite effective. But it is not perfect. Especially business customers often get forced to solve captchas in our system.

If you know of a better solution (other than: don't be a big online shop), I'm all ears.

Fantastically beautiful keyboard!

Keyboards are such a good hobby project. The scope is comparatively small, yet within that scope you get in contact with many different and highly interesting subjects and challenges. And you can more or less pick and choose, which ones you engage with (wireless vs wired, soldering vs hand-wired, custom firmware vs. ZMK/QMK, split vs. traditional).

You can buy ZSA split keyboards with labels on the keycaps. Its great while you are still learning to type on these rather exotic keyboards. As you get more proficient, you start to rely more and more on the "central" keys (using layers toggles to put, say arrow keys on the home row). Muscle-memory is often more than enough.

That said, I have kept the number row labelled. These keys are not obscured by your hands and they can give you the necessary frame of reference. The ideal trade-off for me.