I have a small drawer of cables. If cable+1 doesn't fit, I have too many cables.

The history of Chrome and Safari traces back to KTML, the renderer for Konqueror, a niche browser on Linux with so little market share there weren't real conversations about it ever seriously competing with Firefox or IE.

Then something unexpected happened: Apple adopted KHTML for Safari's WebKit. WebKit was then adopted as the render for Chrome

Could a niche browser still become mainstream /today/? I think so.

The web standards are enormously complex compared to that time. Not sure if today's tooling can compensate this.

The complexity of web standards isn't necessarily a bad thing. A lot of the "complexity" (as usually judged by the raw size of the spec) is just existing APIs evolving to be more rigorously defined. Before that level of specificity, browser implementations varied and engineers had to make certain decisions.

A more "complex" spec can sometimes make the job of the engineer simpler.

That's not the kind of complexity that is the problem though. The complexity you have to deal with is just more and more features being shoved into the spec at breakneck speed, or if they are not in the spec, it's just Google adding them to their engine and everyone starts using them anyway to the quasi-monopoly of Chromium-based browsers.

Are they? I feel like the real difference is an insistence on actually enforcing them. There were some really strong standards at the time of IE5, it was just the wild west in terms of what got built. And then you had Tantek Çelik quietly building all of them in IE5 on the Mac. Just a question of where to look.

May just be me being a romantic. Work shut off access to non-Chrome browsers an took away Incognito Mode. Which is fun for QA work.

A distro should be secure-by-default. Omarchy’s design here was insecure by default while the docs have the impression that Docker might be running rootless. Pairing insecure defaults with docs that claim better security is bad.

Vibe docs?

yeap

Apparently the Omarchy plugin ecosystem is also a free for all like the Arch AUR, except the audience includes people who are new to Linux and less likely to understand the risks.

A lot of plugin systems are like that. (See the hyprland, noctalia, or vim/neovim's plugin systems).

More generally, how else would a small project allow plugins that isn't "here is a way to add code" and then anyone can release the code they added? Hell, the linux ecosystem in general is a "free for all", and that is the nature of the platform

Given the choice between a walled garden like Apple's app store or this, give me something open and more risky any day of the week.

It's easy enough for Omarchy folks to add "verified" or "trusted" developers down the line.

I went from `vi` to `vim` to `neovim` to a spiritual successor `helix`, and here's Emacs at release 31 still the dominant fork of the emacs family of editors. Impressive.

GNU Emacs isn't the first Emacs, although it's still an impressively long-lived and vivacious one.

I see that my old M1 Mac Mini with 16 GB memory and 1 TB drive has held value over time, selling for $600 to $700.

A new Mac Mini with that much ram and storage costs about double now.

I wonder how much they tested on non-English languages with fewer synonyms.

To be fair: a year ago the editor was in the center and the AI chat was in the sidebar-- Cursor.

Here they've moved the AI chat to the center and code editor has been pushed to the side.

Zed already has a “agentic layout” for a while. It shifts the ai and threads to be more prominent and moves code + sidebar to the right

The obvious next step is to remove the code editor entirely.

It seems reasonable that a professional-tier of software developers will have tools distinct from everyone else. No matter what the percentage looks like, experts will still be a thing that needs different things.

In my own agent there's no code editor, just the chat session.

I have not missed an integrated text editor.

For me it's probably time to learn to use vim or something similar. I'm the only one that likes coding manually, without all this AI shit? I'm faster writing code myself than trying to explain to artificial stupidity what I intend to do and correct its output. And if I write it myself the code just works, if it's written by the AI it has a ton of bugs. I don't see any value in AI generated code that is not mere code for doing experiments that you don't care about.

There is never a bad time to learn vim! Not only is it a super useful skill if you end up having to edit a file on a server (and you don't want to deal with nano), it also makes coding fun.

Hey me too. This is my morning Zen moment refactoring and cleaning some code before I go back to the agent to earn money. One of the only things that helps me to relax is to do some manual coding...

You can learn Vim, Kakoune, Helix, in that order.

i hate the "agent" side of cursor and the keep pushing me to change to it.

sure if what i want is lots of agents all in different projects so i can jump between them sure but when i'm working on software it is usually one thing at a time and i wan't code visibility over AI chat.

Right, the value is not so clear of having multiple people wade through lengthy LLM responses. Part of the value that a human in the loop adds is figuring out what's correct and important in the response and passing on a more polished result.

Perhaps more broadly AI will hollow out "middle intelligence".

We could end up with a gulf between those who use AI for cognitive inquiry vs passive delegation. Those who accelerate learning by asking "help me understand this" vs those who relinquish understanding and analytical thinking to AI to complete their work.