moughxyz

The Matter With Things by Iain McGilchrist

Completely rewired how I view language, consciousness, and matter.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Matter_with_Things

Viberunner is another stab at this idea: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44236729

I made an app that lets you build one-off desktop utilities: https://viberunner.me

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44236729

Ultimately I think it’s too open ended. Users got overwhelmed with a chat interface and couldn’t think of something useful to build on the spot.

Maybe a slow burn approach works best.

Is this the first time we can say “iPhone has had this feature for years”? :)

It’s quite excellent btw. Almost magical. There is a “Studio Lighting” preset that truly does give you a studio lighting like aura, and lights up the foreground while darkening the background.

You can kind of still see the artifacts of the AI processing as the subject moves, but it’s not too discernible.

Here’s a video I recorded using this feature: https://youtu.be/HqS5r18xRP0

Oh, and it works flawlessly on wifi too so you don’t even have to be plugged in!

Here was my reply, but of course a nuanced refutation doesn't get as much attention as an agitative tirade :) There's definitely truth to the fact that our self-hosted setup requires a lot of Docker containers and thus resources, but things like "your notes are not yours anymore" and "proprietary solutions for everything" are very much egregiously exaggerated for effect. A nuanced, honest take wouldn't be homepage worthy, and OP's awareness of this is evident by their excellent headline writing :)

https://old.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/10oz4pl/im_done...

I will say that attempting to experiment with self-hosted economics has always been a dangerous undertaking, but I believe the current state wasn't viable and made it so that avoiding prioritizing self-hosting UX was more economically lucrative than making self-hosting as great as it can be. And the latter is something I'd love to focus on more. Some more thoughts here: https://standardnotes.com/blog/making-self-hosting-easy-for-...

For me, it’s for the love of the game. I like being productive and being challenged more than I like being indolent.

I imagine pro athletes might feel the same way. You have to enjoy playing the game for its own sake. The joy of a championship only lasts a few days.

It is largely unsolvable if you rely fully on the server. I describe here how we handle this at Standard Notes where the client can reject weak parameters from the server: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34506062

The way we solve server-side iterations with Standard Notes (which uses Argon2 and not PBKDF2) is to tie the derivation parameters (iterations, bytes, etc) to a hard-coded protocol version number. Accounts which register today for example have a protocol version of 004, which corresponds to specific, immutable derivation parameters.

For a given user, the client then receives from the server not key derivation parameters, but the version of the account. The client then maps that version to the precompiled derivation parameters.

Of course a server can then misreport a user's account version to something lower than it actually is. There are two solutions we implement here:

1. Deprecate older versions as quickly as possible after new protocol version rollouts. Older versions begin to get rejected by clients and clients will not allow sign in to proceed.

2. Allow an optional sign-in flag users can check called "Strict sign in" that forces the client to reject any server provided version that is not specifically the latest version. This means that if a user checks this option and the server reports a version != 004, the sign in will be rejected and the client will not perform any sort of handshake with the server.

More here: https://standardnotes.com/help/security/encryption

There's no reason it has to hurt UX in theory. The difficulty is just in spending a lot of extra time perfecting the animations and interactions, which is 100% doable. We just released navigation present and dismiss animations a few weeks ago, which feel pretty great imo. They're non-interactive, and again, this will take a lot of extra work you get for free with native, but the tradeoff is worth it for us, and again, amenable.

Eh, these are easy fixes. We're making progress daily on making it feel more "native" (i.e recently added present/dismiss animations). Try the demo[0] in your mobile browser, should feel pretty smooth. We've tested extensively on a whole range on devices and performance wasn't an issue. It's really the animations (or lack thereof) that make or break perception of "jankiness." What we have now is our first solid functionality-oriented release; next releases focus on tidying up the edges.

[0]: https://standardnotes.com/demo

> There will be a move away from React Native back towards WebView based toolkits such as Capacitor and Tauri (I think Tauri will win over Electron in the long run), as people realise that a web view is just as performant. Complimented by strategic use of NativeScript.

Exactly what we did with Standard Notes. Never looked back. Wrote about what this looked like for us: https://blog.standardnotes.com/40921/no-react-native-is-not-...

Well said.

I would say not a waste, but not as effective past a certain scale when applied to company building, as compared to a network of intelligence. Of course my tone in my blog is more anecdotal/story-telling/journalesque, so if I’ve painted my argument as being scientific or conclusive then surely my fault :)

File backups need to be done in real time, otherwise backing up gigabytes of data on demand would be infeasible.

We recently released this feature for Standard Notes[0]. Files you upload to your account from any device are automatically encrypted and backed up to a local folder on your computer.

Granting companies full custody of your files today feels reckless; local backups are a must. And better it be encrypted.

[0]: https://standardnotes.com

Is iPhone private? Apple says it is. Yet Apple also has the keys to user iCloud data. I agree that with proper metaphor the distinction becomes very clear, but in the open I’m not so sure if this distinction is well-defined, well-used, or well-understood.

Hmm, I wonder if swapping "private" for "secure" would change the framing. Would an application touting "secure" in their tagline, but offering an insecure plugin architecture, be disjointed? I ask because the interchangeability of "private" and "secure" has always been a fascinating dilemma to me. Their definitions are precisely what I try to poke into in this post.