gabrielgio

> Equality can be achieved using capital systems and market economies.

Sure, it is just going to be a eternal battle between the need of capital for infinity growth and the need of working class for better wealth distribution.

I read it more like that people should start tracking success of country not based on how much health it produces and start caring about the actual quality of live of its people. People can't eat GDP or sleep under it

My initial rant to your comment was about this:

> And I don't get why people keep trying to convince me that I do. It's about me, my opinion should have some value, right? :-)

I have no problem whatsoever if you don't like jj or use git or whatever else you like.

Let's paddle back:

- you are in post about jj

- you comment why you don't like jj

- I comment why I like jj

- you post that.

Like, what is your intention here? If you don't have good faith into trying to understand the tooling, how would it fit your workflow and deflects everything with "I know git, git works, don't tell me to use something else" what is your goal here?

My problem is not your opinion on the tool, is how you approach the debate.

> I honestly am not.

You literately are, look at you comments.

> I am genuinely interested.

If you are interest in learning you should take people words on good faith, my comment on "jj git push -r '(trunk()..@ | @::)'" is complex operation to update many stacked PRs not compared to local git index operations. Also in my comment I mentioned revsets and the "-r". It is a language to query logs which you should've check if you genuinely wanted to learn about it, which you don't.

Just look at your answer, you literately ignored everything I mentioned and took what I said out of context just to bash on jj for some reason.

> I don't have a lot of problems with git that I need to solve, that's the thing. And I don't get why people keep trying to convince me

You are in *forum* in a post *about jj* saying there is no reason to use jj. We are just interacting as you'd expect in forum. If you don't see any reason to use anything else and don't want to hear anything about it steer away from these posts.

No one is trying to convince you personally, we are just discussing the tool. Go use git and be happy.

I sincerely won't read anything else past that line.

> "you should use jj because it's a lot better at solving problems you don't have"

It is more like "you should use jj because then you won't have a lot of problem with git that you'd need git to solve"

> it shouldn't be that hard to explain, should it?

It is not. There are plenty of example on this page. For me the biggest one is stacked PR, jj makes it trivial since it tracks the change sets and not commit ids (which are immutable). So you can work on any level of the stacked PR independently, once you're done run "jj git push -r '(trunk()..@ | @::)'" and it will update all the remote branches accordingly. Another feature that works great with stacked PR is that you don't need to solve conflicts right away. You will see a marker in the "jj log" and you can solve it later down the road.

Also another great feature is the operation log, you can just rewind your actions. F'd up a conflict resolution? Just go "jj op undo". That goes for everything, including file changes and rebases. Want to go back the state it was 15 min ago because you didn't like what you did? Merge to the wrong place? "jj op undo"

Adding to that there are hundreds paper cuts that jj fixes, like:

* Simpler mental model for local change, no git stash/add necessary.

* Simpler commit process, you can just work and use "jj describe" whenever where git forces you to write message before creating commit (again because commits are immutable).

* Starting a work is much easier, I can just go "jj new" away without caring about detached head. Nowdays I just use branches (jj bookmarks) for git compatibility reasons.

* Revsets are amazing, much more powerful and expressive than git logs, and since the UX is more consistent you can always work with set of rules that expects a revset with "-r".

Ofc, you can do all of that with git, but it just works better, easier and more consistent with jj.

> that _is_ essentially the Go team's take these days

It is not "essentially their take". It is one of the point (a weak one for what my opinion is worth) but far from their main point. Their main point from the text is the same point they always make in these cases:

> Coming up with a new syntax idea for error handling is cheap; hence the proliferation of a multitude of proposals from the community. Coming up with a good solution that holds up to scrutiny: not so much.

> the goal is to have hordes of the cheapest possible juniors kitted out with tools that let them produce the most amount of code per dollar

I share the same concern here. I don't have a solid opinion on how that will turn out but I'm not too optimistic.

Generic is not about reducing how many keys you press but how you abstract your logic from the type. In go, it reduces a lot code making it safer and faster. Handling interface{} was just painful.

This is an extreme example and I hardly think anyone writing go code on a daily bases will need anything close to this. I haven't and I have not seen any lib that does anything remotely similar to that. To be honest, hardly anything beyond the stdlib will need to handle generics. They aren't widely used but quite useful when needed, which I think it is sweet-spot for generics.

I don't share the same animosity against generics. I like the recent language addition to the stdlib and am also waiting for them to add some sugar to reduce the boilerplate in error handling.

> Especially in the era of AI assistants, the downside of writing out explicit types and repetition matters very little

Yeah, let's design languages based on the capabilities of code assistance /s

> booming capitalist society that the entire world wanted to take part in.

You can't be that naive. Not every country wanted and a lot of them were forced into.

> They can't create any meaningful gap for a very long time.

That highly depends on the size and natural resource available to the country.

There is movement across different European countries to move FOSS in a attempt to achieve some digital sovereignty.

or change the consumer habit to consume less, and/or change how things are produce in order to them last longer (reduce planned obsolescence) or even better we rebuild the system to serve human needs instead of feeding capitalism's endless growth.

> Only paying customers seem happy about Kagi.

It is paid service, what is the other option? People that don't use the service being happy with it?

> because their brain wants to justify them paying for search

It is search engine, not candy crush. No one wants to pay for searching, if they do it is because they find it useful. It is not their brain gets a shot of dopamine every time they do a search on it.

> He earned a lot, I mean a lot of respect for building his empires from 0

Why do people fall for that? He didn't start from 0, he literally had financial backing from his family.

It is not wishful thinking from acolytes, it is development effort from the freedesktop group. Most of the effort it is now target wayland.

X11 is not deprecated yet but probably won’t get many new features (e.g. HDR).

> but they sacrifice the full-featured nature of a desktop environment.

_For me_ it is not a sacrifice, it is conscious choice. I have everything on the tip of my finger and have all (or most) of my config done in a single file, I don't need a heavier DE for no benefit.

> increased control over their workspaces and the ability to customize their desktop...

Is it even achievable? I don't think you can't have the full-featured nature of gnome and the control of sway. They have antagonistic design. For example, on sway you set up your workflow by composing a lot of software together (with things like wofi, mako etc), while on gnome it is already a cohesive package with everything you need already in place (and trying to change that is uphill battle).

Also if the author allow me, the text is quite prolix, you say the same thing over and over again without providing any concrete example.

> there is a limited number of desktop environments that offer non-traditional (MS Windows-like) window management.

Like what? From those DE you have listed what are they missing? Why do you need more?

> we can't handle mild political disagreement

Do you take transphobia and covid denial as "mild political disagreement"?

That, for me, is not mild, and anyone that repeats this kinda garbage should put into the trashcan of history.

I love that "let's keep things apolitical" then just talk about politics that he might disagree with.

There is not such a thing as apolitical. If you say something of sort you are just in agreement with the current political status quo you are inserted on. Just by his definition of "I only talk when things really get political" is statement to that.

Open source software is political statement, and imho it benefits from being more political (or open about it) not "less".

Also this whole videos plays like a series of click baity phrases, I couldn't watch through.

> Why does it always seem like the tech industry hates small businesses?

They is venting/complaining about SUSE not caring about small companies. That is it.

> Are you saying that $2500 is an unreasonable amount for a small business to invest in itself or let alone within startup costs?

No, he is saying that is too much money to spend on something you don’t need.

I fail to understand how this is related to WFH? That happened while you were working from home, not because you were working from home.

What is the point of your comment? We are not allowed to complain about a service we don’t own anymore?

It was not forced in the sense that git itself still allow you to use master and still is the default but it was definitely stunt from big company to gain/test good faith of the people without achieving nothing.

Still relevant: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26487854

You mean something like?

"If nothing is right/ethical/moral so I can do whatever to the other"

I'm not advocating for violence, neither endorsing GP's action. I just stated that morality is weak base to judge any action.

I think morality is shallow concept to base any analysis, because, in the end, where there is morality when you live in a system based on exploitation of labour?

I'd argue that a lot of company don't need so but they do anyways for the sake of infinity growth.

I have been using for years now. I don't have big requirements for a personal finances software. I mainly use it for cataloging my expenses so I can have a overview to where my money goes. I created a script that pushes my bank account export and have a series of rules to tag it automatically[1] and that is it.

And for what I use it just works. I don't have any complains, docs are good, plenty of tutorial available and it is easy enough to setup and update (I don't use docker for it). I can't ask more of a software tbh.

[1]: https://docs.firefly-iii.org/how-to/firefly-iii/features/rul...

> In the US no notice is legally required.

Required or allowed? So in the US you can't give notice?

It is not free, just the first tier.