Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | volemo's commentslogin

Thanks for the recommendation!

Also check out the pull requests on that repo if there's something useful - in my case I've been using eat as single terminal instance for a while now - but for replacing stand alone terminals just opening multiple instances via multi-sh or similar isn't really helping for finding the terminals again. My solution was patching eat to allow buffer renames to the terminal title, and for ssh sessions, initially set the terminal title to the host I'm connecting to. Now I can easily find the terminals when switching buffers.

On top of that I'm using eyebrowse to have multiple workspaces, and some hooks around buffer switching that switch to the workspace a buffer is on instead modifying the current workspace.


tmux?

But I don’t want another room in my apartment (nor can I afford one), I like walking / taking a tram to work (when the commute time is sane), and I like interacting with (most of) my colleagues. Wat nou?

I feel same, but I still believe people should have the choice.

Unfortunately many people are unable (unwilling?) to grasp this logic and mistakenly assume that if something works for them, it obviously has to be the same way for others.

Exactly this.

That said, I think both hybrid/distributed teams and individuals suffer a bit from mixed remoteness, and I'd strongly consider working somewhere where in-person teams are fully so (eg not mixed with remote folks) and vice versa.


As far as I understand iOS’s behaviour, there’s no way to do what you’re asking unless you’re Apple Inc.

The Nextcloud app kind of does it, it seems. The fact that it stops working seems unrelated: starting the app doesn't make it recover, so it just seems buggy.

Nextcloud uses the location permission for some reason, presumably to wake up the app in the background once in a while? At least it can be closed (and "swiped away") for 2 months and keep syncing. Until it breaks and stops working entirely.


That’s surprising to hear! I’d love to know how they managed it. (I’m not willing to familiarise myself with the codebase, of course.)

I have this dilemma.

> Why not encrypt your server?

I’d like to provide the service to my semi-extended family — not just me and my partner, but also my parents and siblings. And I respect their privacy, so I want to eliminate even the possibility of me, system administrator, accessing their photos.


> We got to this stage of having to sync because Apple can’t stand putting more storage on client devices.

It's not why I use sync services. All my photos fit on my devices (more or less). But I want to have seamless access to my files from both of my devices. And most importantly the sync is my first line of backup, i.e. if my phone gets obliterated I don't loose a day or two of files and photos, I only loose a couple of minutes.


Yes, but it's a one times occurrence, isn't it?

I'd imagine if you're person who make a lot of photos / videos slow sync can be pretty annoying. Unfortunately I'm not one of them to tell, but just had to wait like a week for the first sync of my wife's iPhone to finish.

Better “thinking” computers will breed worse thinking people, huh?

Dr. Walter Gibbs: Won't that be grand? Computers and the programs will start thinking and the people will stop.

Look at GPS and then "self-driving" cars.

With GPS we have seen people confidently drive past road closed signs and around barriers off bridges.

With self-driving technology, we have seen them defeat safe guards so they can sit in the back while the car accelerates up to 70 in a subdivision.


that, and instead of increases of productivity reducing people's need to work, what might (I think, will) happen is that we will actually have to work more for worse results and lower incomes, for the whims of the executive class and increased energy requirements for LLMs. compound this control over channels of communication (google, facebook, xitter), means of production (microsoft, amazon), with force of social-emotional manipulation of LLMs and we have a really "winner" technology.

I do not think the executive class is actually in on the power of AI to increase productivity, but rather to increase reliance.


Socrates allegedly was opposed to writing since he felt that it would make people lazy, reducing their ability to memorize things. If it wouldn't be for his disciple Plato who wrote down his words, none of his philosophy would have survived.

So I'm not completely disagreeing with you, but I also am not too pessimistic, either. We will adapt, and benefit through the adoption of AI, even though some things will probably be lost, too.


> We will adapt, and benefit through the adoption of AI, even though some things will probably be lost, too.

“What doesn’t kill you, makes you stronger”. We will adapt and benefit, or we will not — time will tell.


> Better “thinking” computers will breed worse thinking people, huh?

I actually think that will be the case. We're designing society for the technology, not the technology for the people in it. The human brain wasn't built to fit whatever gap is left by AI, regardless of how many words the technologists spew to claim otherwise.

For instance: AI already is undermining education by enabling mental laziness students (why learn the material when ChatGPT can do your homework for you). It seems the current argument is that AI will replace entry-level roles but leave space for experienced and skilled people (but block the path to get there). Some of the things LLMs do a mediocre but often acceptable job at are the things one needs to do to build and hone higher-level skills.


Totally agree.

> Half of the features in the last 2-3 iOS releases were in Cydia over a decade ago.

And I don’t even care about the features. Just give me stability and reliability. Don’t bluntly break what was working before. Spend some time on bug fixing. Please, Apple.


Yep, I don't really understand why the author didn't make it one per day for 24 days. Am I missing something obvious?

Since the start, each problem has 2 parts (2 "stars"). Part one sets up the problem, ensures you have parsed the input correctly, etc. After submitting the correct answer to that part, part 2 is revealed, which sometimes expands the proplem space, adds new limits, etc. Something that solves part 1 might be inadequate for part 2.

Yes, but nothing (theoretically) stops him from saying: "congratulations, you have solved part 1, wait until tomorrow for part 2".

I think either the author thinks people appreciate more the 2 stages challenge, than having one problem each day; or, more likely, the whole "infrastructure" is already prepared for 2 stages challenges per day. And changing that meant more work, eventually touching literally 10 y.o. code. The reason for the reduced days is exactly the lack of time. I assume he preferred to have 12 days, and modify as little as possible the old code. Having 1 stage per day maybe would have been possible at the expense of having less challenges, which again defeats the purpose.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: