noctuid

I like it infinitely more than anything, but it also still feels like a comparably slow, crufty pos that will probably die because of how anti-AI half the core community is. Regardless of how good magit is, it's slow.

I also can't understand how people like eca and agent-shell so much unless they've never actually used any decent harness. Neither seems to really fit with emacs. Acp is the exact opposite of extensible, and eca isn't really extensible either.

This a session search tool, and I think calling it a memory tool is confusing.

> Secrets: The ctx README mentions saving the text as is and warns about the need to review the output data before publishing. deja explicitly removes known secret templates at the indexing stage (replacing them with tags like [redacted:aws-key]).

How is this not security theater? You've presumably already sent the api key to an LLM if it's in your session file. You need to rotate it.

It's not easy, that's why they all suck.

No one mentioned vi, I like neovim just fine, and I'm using pi daily. Nice try though. My only point is that if you want to talk about rewriting everything yourself, NIH, churn, whatever you want to call it, Emacs is absolutely not a great example.

The new thing where everyone just vibe codes their own versions of everything is not at all like personalizing Emacs.

Specifically the idea that people generally just ignore existing versions of packages and make their own has never been the case, especially compared to other editors (even VSCode).

> There are popular elisp packages lots of people use. But except for Magit, nerds are alarmingly apt to replace them with their own shinier versions (and then to show them off, transitioning to the spore-forming phase of the elisp lifecycle). Everything in Emacs is malleable.

> Until now, the Achilles heel of Emacs culture has been that, except for Magit, its packages tend to be wretched user experiences. Ugly, slow, and discoverable only after inflicting years of elisp cortical injuries on yourself.

Terrible analogy. Emacs has always had comparably fewer major options for packages compared to other tools, there is often an obvious option based on your needs, and it has never been my experience that people decide to just roll their own versions of everything. The author has clearly never used neovim or now pi. NPM packages in general would have also been a way better example.

Edit: Sure there is some small overlap here, but it's really not comparable and definitely not like the way the author describes things. User personalization in Emacs has normally been on a much smaller scale than rewriting entire packages. Configuration is generally smaller tweaks or things on top of existing packages because Emacs provides cohesive extensibility to the point that it often doesn't require "rolling your own." Most packages are already extremely configurable and tailorable. You don't magically get that sort of environment with LLMs. Emacs is much more cooperative/generalized.

The scale and type of custom/personalized software we're seeing now with AI is completely different from how things have been in Emacs. I'm not saying that's a good or bad thing (I think it's both), but it's very different from Emacs and definitely more comparable to something like vim/neovim where (in part just because of the sheer popularity) you constantly have people "rolling their own" packages and a billion versions of everything. Even that is not a great analogy. This is something completely new.

What's just as crazy is people defending ollama.

You can take modal editing anywhere, but that doesn't mean you should.

There are many better sandboxing options than docker (in terms of security and/or ease of use), and it sounded like you weren't doing sandboxing.

Is this satire? I can never tell anymore.

Functionally you can focus any workspace on any monitor, and ids do not change when doing that. You can set things up both ways, but it's actually easier to just have a key focus workspace x on the current monitor than to lock workspaces to specific monitor.

Hyprland works with nvidia just fine with minimal coniguration, just as well as any other wayland compositor I've tried, and I have a very old card. Having out of date packages is going to be an issue on Ubuntu for software in general, but probably sway would be better to try.

There is also scroll (sway fork) and plugins for hyprland. Scrolling experience was not actually better in niri vs. others in my experience just because it was built around it. I tried to use niri, but there is too much missing functionality I want compared to hyprland and also worse power consumption.

Workspaces are not bound to displays in hyprland. This is one major reason I'm using hyprland over niri, where it's not really possible to work around that issue.