dayjah
Were early in this cycle, we will learn to do more, and exercise our new capabilities more fluently, which in turn will create more skilled practitioners
Consider the abacus, calculator, computer, etc, each of these enhanced mathematicians’ capabilities and thus outputs.
Premise goes: our brains are infinitely more efficient at reasoning than current computational architectures. Presumably because our synapse permits allow for non linear connections in a dense space (grey matter). At a biotech I worked at the phrase that described this difference was “volumetric computation” vs “linear computation”; I can’t find a reasonable description of this online so I’m going to assume it was a house term.
This site seems to suggest the internal geometry of the connective/reasoning layer is more important that having more data. This causes me to think “graph” vs “array”.
Or yeah, maybe it’s just slop and some number of people will be creative and buy the hype ^_^
I’ve done plenty of wire protocol work, and length prefixed strings are great to work with. I’ve also been lucky that those strings were typically contained within a broader payload. To that end, I’ve not had to think about the case of many strings one after another.
At work we’ve been discussing whether to migrate off our home grown component library to Material UI. I shudder at the thought, personally. However, a compelling reason to use a ubiquitous framework is that the ubiquity means folks intuitively know how to interact with your product.
Like many of us I was born into a deeply customizable Internet, all of my websites were green or red on black. They were a glorious amalgam of fixed width fonts and <blink> tags. With occasional wingdings characters for fun and games and complex <table>/<tr>/<td> tags for really epic layouts. They were l33t, honestly ^_^
But, as time goes on and more and more people use this thing, converging on the one-true-UX feels like a net good thing assuming the fundamentals are right. To some degree the LLM-ization of the Internet is essentially the end game of squashing the personality out of the Internet which bootstrap started.
We’re on the cusp of spoken word being the core UX of computers with a fall back to reading the LLM transcript, neither of which benefits from <blink>
Unfortunately.
Personally, I still pay Zed because I think they’re doing great foundational work. However I’ve now almost entirely migrated to helix for editing needs.
Another option you may want to try is mux (github.com/coder/mux). It wraps the LLM in a nice interface which has the ability to do line/block comments on changes by the LLM that then goes goes into your next prompt. It’s very early stage though: v0.19.0.
For example, in Texas there are loads of TexMex restaurants and Hispanic cultures actually embrace children as part of the environment vs Western European cultures (which I was raised in) which don’t so much.
As I said: horses for courses.
I think you may be observing context rot? How many back and forths are you into when you notice this?
Here are the links from my journal:
This went into nixpkgs: https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/376988
Which then changed the api between and broke this: https://github.com/LnL7/nix-darwin/blob/master/modules/nix/n...
The fix took a few hours, I happened to be one of the first folks bit by it: https://github.com/LnL7/nix-darwin/pull/1318
I also have in my notes that Emilazy is a super star: https://github.com/emilazy
Notes on how I worked around it for the time it was broken:
> To work around it on myside I tried various things. Fundamentally I rolled back to nixpkgs-24.11-darwin which needed corresponding changes to nix-darwin (nix-darwin-24.11) and home-manager (release-24.11) to get everything working.
https://github.com/zed-industries/zed/issues/26277
About 4mos ago I moved to using brew for zed because at the time there was some hard block on updating rustc in nixpkgs-stable to a version which included some feature that zed relied upon.
I got here through devenv, I was fully bought in on its proposal and once I found its edges I started peeking under the covers to understand how it worked.
At that point I was pretty deep in mise for everything that wasn’t using devenv. This perhaps help frame why I see them solving the same problem.
I definitely had my “aha!” and ditched mise because nix seemed it had solved my problems. But now, in a new gig, I’m running into lots of edge cases that mise could solve at the drop of a hat and nix (/ my poor understanding of the fundamentals) struggles with.
So, with that all said, I suppose my point is that you get a lot of overlap between the two, and mise is easier to use and get buy-in on. There are certainly elements I find appealing about nix which mise doesn’t touch (promise of repeatable builds, the entire package ecosystem, etc), however.
Along the way I acquired enough talent that use at work seemed reasonable.
As time has gone on, however, I have found things like the stringent need for everything to be built results in archaic packages versions in nixpkgs, etc., while core waits to bump the rustc version. Thus my return to using brew for almost everything albeit managed via nix-homebrew.
Case in point: I use zed, which relies on cutting edge rust features, which nix cannot deploy because of stability concerns. Everyone is right in this situation, but that left me with an archaic version of zed until I moved to the homebrew version.
Consistently through the 25.05 period nix-darwin and nixpkgs would fall out of sync. I learned not to `nix flake update` too often as a result. It’s amazing that rolling back is as easy as it is, and that’s huge, but if you squint and reason that mise and nix solve the same issue, why not use the less opinionated, easier to reason about mise?
As time has gone on, more and more of my system is managed via nix-homebrew … effectively producing a Brewfile for the vast majority of my package needs. Why not just use Brewfile directly?
I really want to advocate for nix, but it feels like I lose the “why not x?” conversations with myself, I can’t fathom winning them against a less invested peer.
I’m under the impression you need to radiate through matter (air, water, physical materials, etc).
Is my understanding of the theory just wrong?
I’d often change a file, forget that it was backed by the chezmoi store, later find myself trying to reconcile the differences, just so I could commit and share w/ another computer. nix + home-manager and snowfall lib, once over the multi month ramp up, have been such a breath of fresh air in multi system management
I simultaneously don’t want anyone to see mine while desperately seeking affirmation that mine is not weird ^_^
Happy to hear I’m not alone!
America has had multiple attempts at solutions for healthcare over the years, each started with good intent and then waylaid by various causes to produce what we have right now.
A sibling comment mentions political compromise to pass the ACA, as an example of this.
Another example is that HMOs were started with inherent goodness, but got “corrupted” (in my mind) by profit seeking.
To directly answer your question: a core tenet of the Republican tent is minimal government involvement in day to day lives of the citizenry. Ergo, the Swiss system won’t work because it involves a lot of bureaucracy. Republicans link bureaucracy to cost, and feel this is not an appropriate use of tax payers dollars.
The holes in this political doctrine are not part of my answer here fwiw. Please no “but…” comments to that end :)
Broadly speaking though, I think you’re experiencing confirmation bias to some degree. If you only look at companies that are on the struggle bus, then you only see a limited number of levers that management has (RIF, delay CapEx, etc). Other struggling companies that don’t take evasive maneuvers go out of business and we don’t hear the story.
edit: it’s not covered in the post, but it is on the launch and doc site: https://secretspec.dev/providers/onepassword/