corytheboyd

> The home equivalent of a fast food kitchen ticket printer!

Exactly where my head went haha, next thought was having a clip to hold the recipe up :p

Is there something out there like this that is self-hosted? It’s ridiculous that this isn’t, and it’s going to become a pay-per-print model?! I don’t care about the AI nonsense, it’s a printer.

I could see myself using something like this to print recipes. I’d like to avoid getting my fancy cook book dirty, but have still have recipe in the kitchen to reference. Phone works okay until you have to scroll with dirty/wet hands.

Oh yeah that would be a great use of AR, totally agree, and feel like we’re not even that far off on this one.

I feel like VR would have “happened with the masses” by now given that the quest is wireless, excellent quality, and cheap. Personally I think it did, and it’s a success, it’s just that it has a lower ceiling because it’s an awkward rectangle that you strap to your face.

There is also, IMO, a huge software quality problem with VR.

I am baffled as to why all the first person games don’t copy Alyx’s control scheme, it’s the only one that feels correct to use. The rest of the first person games feel awful to play, once you get past the gimmick of “wow cool”.

Music/rhythm games work really well for VR, but that’s always going to be a niche market. I play beat saber all the time, it’s fantastic.

Everything else seems to be sandbox games. Fucking sandbox games. They’re funny the first time, but you can only throw objects so many times before the magic is lost, you just wish there was an actual game there to play.

I love VR, and I hope developers continue to innovate with it, but it’s never going to overtake console gaming, it’s just too different.

I don’t get why we think AR is going to be any different for games. Why would I want to see my living room while playing a game? VR puts you in whole other worlds. It’s… that simple, I think.

Please tell me the joycons are built with a more robust analog stick… it was hard to tell if they changed at all in this video. That’s about my only gripe with the switch, those sticks drift so badly if you so much as look at them.

Ah yes, I’ve heard it makes the hell of huge conflict ridden rebases a bit less annoying. Always wished I could just get to the end of the rebase to see it all in context, _then_ resolve conflicts, but with the option to resolve the obvious ones along the way too.

A simple one!

One year it was just my parents and I for Christmas. None of us are that big on elaborate gift giving, we just want to see each other. Unknowingly we had all purchased some form of booze for one another, so we spent the evening chatting with libations by the fire, it was wonderful :)

Huh this comment thread may have convinced me to finally try it. I’m comfortable with git, and fixing mistakes in git, but not being able to trivially reverse any and every transaction is annoying.

Imagine a TUI where you need to navigate a literal maze of options

Agree.

It’s very hard for anyone who isn’t the author, or otherwise intimately familiar with the code, to understand changes at a glance. The reader needs high level explanations and documentation to quickly build the correct mental model to understand the change in context.

If you can look at 1000 lines of diff and accurately tell what it’s doing, and much more importantly, the upstream and downstream implications… you’re either lying, or somehow work in a perfect hermetic vacuum of verifiability that I am very jealous of.

> I find a growing trend of people wanting to talk over each other, start talking before someone has finished their thought, people wanting to dominate the conversation

Been noticing this at work meetings. It’s annoying because if you want to be heard, you have to become part of the problem… I hate it. I wonder if social media has anything to do with this, since it created a way to “win” conversations, and heavily encourages you to do so. Zoom meetings do amplify this problem, so maybe it’s always been like this and I forgot?

In large social groups I shutdown if people talk over me. I don’t want to fight to be part of a conversation. It’s fine, I’ll have moments here or there, though it does make me look quiet and weird… but there are other friends that don’t talk over me and I doubt they would say the same thing (the quiet part at least lol)

I don’t think it sounds ridiculous, it sounds like you picked the right tool for the job. Don’t bring dynamic solutions to static problems…

I too respect these games but cannot for the life of me play them. I’ve tried to get into DF a few times and it’s just too low-fidelity for me, nothing feels like it matters. It’s just not for me and that’s okay! Glad they made a bunch of hard earned money off of it on steam recently :)

Thank you for making this a one time purchase, not a subscription.

> which, for most of the SMS services, is a strike against the spammer.

Huh, didn’t know that. I assumed that it was nothing more than baiting a response, verifying that the phone number is a hit.

Very nicely highlighted in the article:

> You find yourself in a quest for productivity, feeling productive because of the quest, but not really doing any productive work.

Been there a million times myself, it’s such an easy trap to fall into.

Free text is just the fundamentally wrong input for precision work like this. Because it is wrong for this doesn’t mean it has NO purpose, it’s still useful and impressive for what it is.

FWIW I too have been quite frustrated iterating with AI to produce a vision that is clear in my head. Past changing the broad strokes, once you start “asking” for specifics, it all goes to shit.

Still, it’s good enough at those broad strokes. If you want your vision to become reality, you either need to learn how to paint (or whatever the medium), or hire a professional, both being tough-but-fair IMO.

Another thing people won’t appreciate is ANY amount of friction when they “just want to log something real quick”. Which has merit, you’re debugging some garbage, and need to log something out in production because it’s dumb, harmless, quick, and will tell you exactly what you need. That’s why I think you need a sort of fallback as well, for something like this to capture enough mindshare.

How did your solution work out in terms of adoption by others? Was it a large team using it? What did those people say? Really curious!

Agreed. At that point you need specialized tools anyway.

You know what would actually kill for saving on log data? Being forced to use an efficient format. Instead of serializing string literals to text and sending all those bytes on each log, require that log message templates be registered in a schema, and then a byte or two can replace the text part of the message.

Log message template parameters would have to be fully represented in the message, it would be way too much work to register the arbitrary values that get thrown in there.

Next logical step is to serialize to something more efficient than JSON— should be dead simple, it’s a template followed by N values to sub into the template, could be a proprietary format, or just use something like protobuf.

It’s better than compression, because the data that was being compressed (full text of log message template) is just not even present. You could still see gains from compressing the entire message, in case it has text template values that would benefit from it.

I get it, we lost human readability, which may be too big of a compromise for some, but we accomplish the main goal of “make logs smaller” without losing data (individually timestamped events). Besides, this could be made up for with a really nice log viewer client.

I’m sure this all exists already to some degree and I just look dumb, but look dumb I will.

Exactly my thoughts, the order of these events by timestamp is itself necessary for debugging.

If I want something like per-transaction rollup of events into one log message, I build it and use it explicitly.

It’s a big club, and you ain’t in it!

Makes sense to me, the range input is effectively acting as the label here, it just happens to be an input as well. Best (better?) of both worlds.

Very clever!

Totally unrelated to this project, just a general UI question: does anyone like these inputs? Every time there is a number input next to one, I use that instead. Seems the upper limit of “ticks” you can have on one before it becomes unusable is like… 10?

Proper number inputs support all the same features (min, max, arrow keys to increment/decrement), but you can also just input an exact number. The range does visualize min, max, and current value relative to those nicely, but it’s annoying to actually use as an input more often than not.

The only real exception is for ranges of 0-100 type things, where the exact value doesn’t need to be precise, just roughly somewhere on that 1-100 scale. Eyeballing it is enough here, you don’t feel frustrated that you can’t use your thumb to get exactly 71. Volume slider, etc.

Lazygit patches are a great way to do this. You can interactively select lines from commits to “pull out” making them easy to form new commits with. Takes some getting used to, but it is the exact flow you are talking about.

https://github.com/jesseduffield/lazygit?tab=readme-ov-file#...

Oh you edited to say drag and drop. Lazygit is a TUI and patches are very much keyboard driven. Still worth thinking about? It’s free!

You need to look further ahead than that though. A sane git history makes debugging much easier. When you bisect your way to a problem area, sure is nice when the suspect lines of code fall into a 10 line change commit with a nice message and body providing context. I’ll let it slide if the PR/MR has a lot of good context, because it’s trivial to link those back to commits/lines.

FWIW the concept of undo/redo is at least novel. Agree it’s not worth paying for though, lazygit does all of this (even undo/redo) for free, as well as… the rest of git workflow.

They’re just talking about interactive rebase, why is that a red flag? At least I work this way, where I make “not so good” commits sometimes, when I know I don’t have a good atomic commit, but want to create a checkin because “something works now”. Then I later use interactive rebase to make the actual atomic commits, with appropriate messages and bodies. Am I was supposed to be perfect on the first pass?

Rule of cool wins again

> But it’s extremely configurable in all the wrong ways

Damn that feels exactly like my experience with Zoneminder. I’m sure it is decent software under the hood, but the UX is downright hostile to anyone who just wants to get IP cameras to do very basic motion detection to record some full resolution footage, which feels like the major, obvious use case that should be optimized for.

I am thankful for OSS existing in this realm, but why do so many solutions make the same mistakes? Am I crazy in thinking that a good out of the box experience is important? Is some critical part of the formula locked behind private walls? Something else? Genuinely curious.