Helix is a really nice editor. I use it as my go-to for when I'm in the terminal environment.
For sufficiently complex manipulations, I find the "selection-action" ("motion-action") to be more intuitive than "action-motion". Even with vim, I'd often like making use of visual mode.
I think the main limitation to this that I believe is it's probably a bit slower for quick + frequent edits compared to vim.
Hadn't heard of this. So I looked at the docs for Ki.
I see the "Why Ki?", and then it has this:
> Being first-class means that it is not an extra or even sidekick; it is the protagonist.
Eh.
I find it quite off putting.
I guess my expectation is that someone enthusiastic enough to write a text editor with a value proposition of "it's got good tree-sitter-based navigation" would want to discuss why they thing syntactic selection is neat.
Seeing cliche LLMisms doesn't signal the same level of care to me.
Having been in the community for some time, it is just how the authors are, very enthusiastic about the wording. They like to come up with some wild terms explaining different behaviors and reasoning behind those behaviors, like "positional coherence" or "behavioral asymmetry", and the term "kimmunity" to reference to ki editor community. On a surface level, sure, it looks LLM generated, but I would be very surprised if they used LLM to generate that sentence. I choose to look at the actual meaning of the content and what they are trying to do differently
To some extend that is true for any opinionated piece of software. But that is a beauty of opensource don't use it if it doesn't match your idea of how that software should look like
It's not generated by LLM, it was actually my idea, but grammar-corrected by LLM, but you are not wrong either, the docs are really subpar in a lot of ways, and not clearly explaining why is one of them, and of course, the potentially cringey sentences too, someone complained the docs read like a Vogue magazine before lol
> Thing is, pretty much all of this missile defence technology is about to become obsolete once hypersonic missiles become more widespread, which is going to happen pretty soon.
I think you'll have to be more specific.
Or I guess to compare with your other observation: """Even with all this protection, Iran [sent] enough ballistic missiles to overwhelm the defences""" -- It's not a binary of "have missile defense or not => every missile will be shot down". An amount of missile defense will make it harder for missiles to successfully hit a target.
Similarly with hypersonic missiles, it's not the binary of "I have a missile that's difficult to defend against, I win".
Having a sword which can defeat a shield isn't in itself sufficient to obsolete the shield. (Infantry can be killed with bullets, yet infantry remain an important part of fighting despite that).
To my understanding, the main difference between "curl directly to bash" and "curl to a temp file, then execute the temp file" is "the attacker could inject additional malicious commands when curl'd directly to bash".
If you're not going to then also read all the source code from the download script (& the source code used to produce the binaries), this suggests the attitude of "I mistrust anything I can't read; but will trust anything I could read (without having to read it)".
It seems more likely that malicious code would be in a precompiled binary, compared to malicious commands injected into "curl to bash". -- Though, if there have ever been any observed cases of a server injecting commands from "curl ... | tee foo | bash", I'd be curious to know about these.
> the attacker could inject additional malicious commands when curl'd directly to bash
There's another issue actually. You're streaming, so ask yourself what happens if the stream gets cut prematurely. I'll give you an example, consider how this like could be cut prematurely to create major issues
rm -rf /home/theuser/.config/theprogram/build_dir
A malicious attacker doesn't need to inject code, they can just detect the stream and use a line like the above to destroy your filesystem. Sure, you might preserve root but `rm -rf /home` is for all practical purposes destroying the computer's data for most people
Or it doesn't have to be malicious. It can just happen. The best protection is writing functions since those have to be created and so can't execute until fully streamed. But so much bash is poorly written that well... just check out Anthropic's install script...
> If you're not going to then also read all the source code
Saving the source code still has a benefit. If something does go wrong you can go read it. Probably a good place to start tbh. In fact, if you're streaming and something goes wrong you'll see exactly what the early termination error did.
Is it good security practice? Absolutely not. Is it a hundred times better than curl-pipe-bash? Absolutely.
> To my understanding, the main difference between "curl directly to bash" and "curl to a temp file, then execute the temp file"...
It's not a temp file in the sense of a regular file. `<()` is also a pipe, hence equivalent. `curl` and `bash` run concurrently.
Running one after the other wouldn't be all that much of an improvement anyway if it's done automatically. One really should manually review the script before running it.
Underdiscussed: The biggest difference these keyboards make: adding additional keys for the thumbs (replacing the unnecessarily large spacebar of traditional keyboards).
This allows the hands to do more with the keyboard while resting the hands on home row. -- For users comfortable adding a bit of complexity for the benefit of increased expressiveness (e.g. vim users), having extra thumb keys allows bringing the full functionality of the keyboard to within reach of the hands on home row.
For me, I think that these keyboards fix many silly design flaws of the traditional keyboard makes them interesting enough to be worth using.
A split keyboard does a good job of enforcing stricter adherence to the home keys so you end up getting quite accurate at the special functions too since everything is within reach. I think extra thumb buttons on a non-split keyboard gets you all the same benefits, I'd love to see more boards explore that.
Yeah the thumb clusters are my favorite part of using my Kinesis Adv 360, and one of the only few things I miss when typing on a regular keyboard. Yeah the ergonomics are better but I can hit 150+ on both regular and split keyboards and never really had pain/issues with my wrists. Although I prefer the split layout more.
I’ve been using split boards since the original Microsoft Natural Keyboard, the one with the awful number pad. Then a Kinesis Advantage, then the 360. The DIY boards like a Lily58, Corne and a similar custom are mostly for travel.
Switching to split or ortholinear takes time. Doing both together is a significant and slightly annoying adjustment and takes a few weeks to feel normal. The payoff is when you lean into it. Home row mods so the home keys become ctrl shift alt meta when held, plus a thumb layer for navigation so you get vim-style movement everywhere, and a symbols layer for the stuff not on the top row.
Two thumb keys per side works well. Layer on both sides, enter on one thumb, space on the other. About 6x4 per side is the sweet spot for me. A function row on things like the Advantage 2 or Glove80 can be handy.
If you want to try it in steps, the Kinesis mWave is a decent bridge. Split but not ortholinear, full keyset so you don’t have to relearn everything at once, mechanical, runs ZMK, and in US pricing it’s very cheap for what it is, roughly $120.
I bought an mWave a few weeks ago, thinking of wading back into Kinesis, and for me it's not a fit. The key feel is garbage compared to my Keychron or my old Advantage, and the flow of the shape isn't comfy enough.
Thumbs: true, but I think some take it way too far - up to seven keys per thumb! The thumb is articulated at the wrong angle to move very far, so I find that two or perhaps three keys per thumb in a single arc is about as much as I can use fast.
Agreed. The thumb cluster is what I miss the most from my old Maltron keyboard. I'm looking at the Dygma Defy as it seems to have the best thumb cluster of current ergo keyboards.
Programmability is really an awesome feature for this very reason. Even with a traditional layout, you can be really creative and improve the ergonomics: tap/hold mod for the spacebar, remap caps lock to do all kinds of stuff...
> Agile should still mean exactly the same thing as it did in the manifesto
I recall Dave Thomas (one of the signers of the manifesto) made the point: He points out "agile" is an adjective, "agile" is not a noun.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-BOSpxYJ9M
In practice, TUIs tend to have good keybindings, & are readily available right in the place where you're running the command (especially for quick tasks).
They can, but don't always. I've used some where you have to smash the TAB key 50 times go move linearly through all the fields and controls. If there are well-implemented navigation keys, yes they it can be very efficient.
I think people's intuition is generally reliable, though. What food has the term "UPF" helped you learn is 'unhealthy', which you otherwise would have thought of as healthy?
For losing fat, "fried chicken", "chocolate cake", and "sugary drinks" are intuitively unhelpful, and "vegetables", "lean meat", "water" is more "healthy".
>What food has the term "UPF" helped you learn is 'unhealthy', which you otherwise would have thought of as healthy?
It's not that I didn't know that certain foods were unhealthy. The term UPF (understood to mean foods that are manufactured specifically to be hyper-palatable while otherwise lacking in nutrients) taught me the reasons why I find certain foods harder to resist than others, and consequently what foods I should focus on instead (higher protein / high fiber).
As long as we pretend this is all just a question of individual choice and willpower, yes. If the goal is regulating the industry so reaching health goals gets easier for everyone, UPF as a concept is useful.
For sufficiently complex manipulations, I find the "selection-action" ("motion-action") to be more intuitive than "action-motion". Even with vim, I'd often like making use of visual mode.
I think the main limitation to this that I believe is it's probably a bit slower for quick + frequent edits compared to vim.
reply