whereistejas

As someone who is a victim of never feeling he has done enough, I totally empathise with this blog post. The incentives which got me into tech were completely intrinsic and altruistic. Over time, I have felt them warp into something which can be best as "capitalist greed", everything is now about wanting more. The first and perhaps the easiest, thing to be sacrificed at the altar of wanting more, is mental health and relationships. Thankfully, I'm conscious of this now and is something I actively work on.

However, this is something I can only do at this point in my life, in my early 20s I was much more of a grind person and even if I could change things I wouldn't change that.

I've been slopfolding since back when it was just called "dumping it in the wardrobe".

Most people in software misunderstand how physical goods work. When making machines you don't care about getting everything perfect all the time, you care about staying within tolerable limits all the time.

How bad do the folds in your laundry need to be for them to be no different then just being dumped in a pile? As long as we are above that point the robot is useful.

i want to read more for the most part. my reading list is evergrowing.

shameless plug: https://whereistejas.com/inbox/

(PS: people who comment about the faults in my website will be downvoted. im sharing my reading list, not looking for a codereview)

that was my experience as well. in my case, i kept running into issues with using chrome plugins.

this is what excites me most about the probable AI future. househelp is cheaply and easily accessible for most people in the east, however being able to afford a cleaner or maid in the west is a luxury. i spent a ginormous amounts of time every week keeping my house in shape. i look forward to the day when i will be able to carve out that time and get it back for myself.

it seems absurd that they would reject a plain and simple name? i imagined company names would be available on first come, first serve basis. why is that not the case?

I didn't suggest that this was useful.

While I agree with your point in general, rewriting a big widely used project in a stricter language is always a good thing. It improves the dev-ex of people contributing to these projects and more importantly helps people seperate logic into silos. Python is inherently limited in which kinds of abstraction it can express.

This reminds me of Kagi's Small Web: https://kagi.com/smallweb/ or https://kagi.com/smallweb/river

nobody ever raised money for nukes from public/private markets on the premise that nukes will bring the world into an age of abundance. AI companies have done that. This comparison of AI and nukes is so silly.

The UI is polarising, for sure. But, I will celebrate anyone who takes on the hard task of creating a new code forge. Best of luck!

incorrect link: https://amododesign.com/careers/

i came here to comment the same! could not be happier!

This may be the most important sentence in that announcement:

expect to be able to bring Mythos-class models to all our customers in the coming weeks.

Just because `jj` wraps around git doesn't mean it cannot have another backend. My comment doesn't imply that it only wraps around `git`. More importantly, the other backend which `jj` offers is (afaik) exclusively used at Google. Unless you are a Googler you will be using `jj` with `git`.

Also, the comment was aimed at a person who is obviously very invested in `git`. I was doing my best to offer them a description of `jj` they could swallow.

PS: pedantic people are annoying.

First of all: you do you and as long as you are happy, I am happy.

`jj` is a tool trying to amplify the strengths of git and strengthen its weaknesses. `git rebase` being just one of the many quirky commands. Yes, `jj` requires some rewiring of your brain, but once you get over the initial bump its pretty slick.

Also, I use `jj` everyday exclusively. And I have written `revsets` like 4 times in total.

its one of the most complex htmx projects i have seen. super cool.

just wanted to share how much i loved this blog post :)

oopsie; should have added links.

`jj` is a wrapper around git and offers a much better dev-ex for managing changes.

it has features like:

- conflicts are first class citizens

- `rebase` is the default mode; there is no need for an interactive rebase mode.

- all descendant changes automatically rebase

- a much more intuitive version of `git reflog`. in `jj`, we have `jj op log`

- cheap branching: branches in `jj` are just tags (or bookmarks) that can be moved around

tangled is a really cool project; the most important feature it provides is that it is jujutsu first.

would https://litestream.io/ be a good solution here?

This actually looks very useful. Cloudflare seems to be brining together a great set of tools. Not to mention, D2 is literally the only sqlite-as-a-service solution out there whose reliability is great and free tier limits are generous.

nevermind, I see what's happening in the UI. Each `jj` change is preserved in the UI and we can see multiple versions of the same change. The stack then is not really a stack of PRs but a stack of changes (where each change has its own history, i.e., the interdiff view). Did I get it mostly right?

Each of your stacked PRs only has one commit. Do you have any examples with multiple commits per PR in a stack?

PS: I love the concept of tangled. I currently use `sourcehut` but may soon move to tangled.

Nothing is insurmountable; however each one of us must play within the practical constraints of our local geographies (political, social, financial and physical). The parent comment probably means that Switzerland is in a positive on all axes unlike the rest of the world.

Yes, I basically gave my vim config along with this blog to Claude and it figured out 95% stuff on its own.

My take on AI-apps is that now its possible to build apps that we kind of wanted to build, but never did because it was too inconvenient.

I'm stealing this idea from this paragraph [1]: > The book points out that the major value in a flying car (as with supersonic) would not be in taking the same trips you do now, only a bit faster. Instead, it would be in taking the trips you don’t take now, because they’re too inconvenient.

[1] https://blog.rootsofprogress.org/where-is-my-flying-car

Did anyone notice how Cursor wasn’t an early tester? I wonder why…

or oxymoron