The - works with git branching as well for those who didn’t know. git checkout - will switch to the previously checked out branch so it effectively toggles between your two most recent branches.

This is a huge one for me. For those who don’t know, this brings up the rev-i-search utility which allows cycling from most recent to oldest commands executed. It also supports partial finds so if you did ‘cd’ it would cycle the most recent change directory commands.

The forward search (in case you’re somewhere in the history stack) is ctrl+s and operates the same except crawls the command history forwards.

I use these constantly in my normal workflow and they save a ton of time.

Can anyone see the token person of color or did they not even bother this time?

Yeah and unfortunately it’s going to get worse when AI agents are also always running in the background (which is inevitable, let’s be honest).

I get what you are saying and this is definitely a factor but I think the bigger influencer was mobile adoption. As soon as smartphones took off it was inevitable that we would see a surge in cross platform frameworks/libraries.

The fact we tackled this problem by shifting everything to web apps was also inevitable given the more simplistic deployment requirements and maintenance costs of a website vs native application.

I feel like I am shouting to the void when I talk about performance of modern software being unbelievably bad.

One could say they are streets behind.

Not the OP but just wanted to say thanks for typing that out. I think it perfectly answers the question, gives several examples/explanations, and provides further research resources. It’s always genuinely great to come across posts like this.

This person obviously has their own way of doing things that works for them and that’s great. Some of his views are patently absurd though. This is mostly commenting on his reasons against using a forge and not a comment that he should do something differently.

Trust

100% fair and I think this is the main take-away from the blog post. If you don’t trust something, don’t use it. Full stop, the post could have ended there and been fine. But then it goes on to say:

You get a workflow imposed on you

You mean like forcing people to use email to submit pull requests to your self-hosted git repos? It doesn’t matter what you are doing, if you are working on an open source project you are going to have workflow limitations. This is arguing a fallacy.

In particular, your project automatically gets a bug tracker – and you don’t get a choice about what bug tracker to use, or what it looks like. If you use Gitlab, you’re using the Gitlab bug tracker. The same goes for the pull request / merge request system.

Nothing is forcing you to use these features so just don’t use them. Plenty of teams use 3rd party tools but host their code in a forge site. Having options available to you automatically is not the same thing as being forced to use them. If it was, JIRA wouldn’t exist because everyone would use github/gitlab/whatever’s built-in issue tracking and project management.

The majority of the post comes across as someone who just doesn’t like the forge sites and aside from the trust aspect, then spent a bunch of effort trying to create associations and limitations between things that don’t exist.

Trust is 100% the main reason not to use a forge site and all the other things cited are superfluous and/or very subjective.

It’s hard to truly internalize this but no matter what you think about something and/or how wrong you think someone else is, we are walking through life with imperfect imaginings of what other people think and feel. Trying to make sense of people is even harder than making sense of a person. And we are quite literally incapable of truly knowing what goes on in someone else’s head.

Definitely ask these questions but don’t drive yourself crazy if people don’t make sense. The behaviors and actions we witness in others are only the emergent characteristics of a lot of brain activity that we aren’t privy to.

This post is a journey, not a destination.

Thank you, I appreciate this response to my comment. It’s given me a wider perspective on the topic in general. It’s almost like that arbitrary side is what keeps the wobble in humanity’s path which forces us to continue advancing and understanding the world, never becoming complacent.

I like it! No need to know the language or anything. Things collect in basins like rain in bowl-shaped rocks so even without our current level of technology it would still have some indication of saving/gathering.

People in this thread are throwing around the term “smarter” a lot and I think we should avoid that. How quick you pick things up might be an indicator for being smart but it is only one aspect. The following are generalizations and there are always exceptions so keep that in mind.

What you will find in life is a lot of the people like you describe have generally shallow knowledge of a subject but are capable of ramping up quickly and filling out that deeper knowledge as needed. Meanwhile, the folks who tend to take longer and study more retain more of the knowledge and are more capable at using it without supplemental data or analysis.

It is the difference between knowing an answer and knowing enough to quickly find or intuit the answer.

Not necessarily. I can see an icon with some randomly-sized vertical lines and think of rain. Or an icon might have a mountain peak silhouhette that generates a random mountain peak. Symbolism doesn’t work in the sense we can’t just design something but I’d argue we could probably come up with something that is at least indicative of saving to people regardless of language. Obviously the floppy fills that for now but if we could go back and drive the adoption of the icon, what icon could we create that would most indicate saving to people regardless of technology.

(I understand there isn’t a correct answer to this, just wanted to read people’s thoughts on ideas)

This would work as long as the device the user was using adopted localization properly and all applications supported all languages. Consider also there are people who can speak a language but aren’t able to read it. Those are a small percentage but they exist.

The goal of this would be to come up with an icon that would be most recognizable as save to the most people and future people after languages have changed.

Yeah I think something along those lines is probably what we’d end up with. We couldn’t do something that is truly universally understood to mean save but I think we’d get a large percentage of users who would make the connection instinctively.

lmao, well done!

No I get that but I’m asking that given what we know about symbols and how we process information, what would be a better icon that can indicate save without having to be taught? There is clearly no right answer here but is it even possible to create something that would work? Things like rain or clouds we can do because there we can see examples. Is there anything that indicates saving we could come up with?

Interesting concept, attempting to indicate something entering the brain/head/statefulness. I wonder if we could generalize it further so that race of underground mole-people would understand it as well (e.g. not a species-specific head).

This is all true but given the charge of creating a new icon that would be the “most recognizable” as save to the most people the first time they see it, what would that look like. The question is impossible to answer with a single thing as it’s too vast and everything becomes meaningless eventually. But given everything we know of languages, the brain, how we perceive things, what would be a better icon we could design?