I genuinely expect that in a few years, Apple will release something that is effectively identical to Google Glass, and that will historically be seen as the real start of wide-spread usage of AR.
Anything less than lightweight glasses is a non-starter outside of gaming and other enthusiasts. The Vision Pro is just too bulky for it to sell serious numbers.
But the whole "but actually you only like what you like for superficial reasons" thing lost me. I really dislike essays that create false dichotomies just so that they can purport to know why what you do is bad or wrong.
Can't someone choose a tool for _both_ rational and aesthetic reasons? In fact, isn't that basically the definition of "best?" And by "best" I (hopefully obviously) mean "best for me/you," not "objectively best."
I'm sure the author would take a dig at me: I have a love of Thinkpads of command lines. Regarding the CLI, I won't deny that I love the aesthetic. That's genuinely why I was originally drawn to them. Vain? Silly? Maybe. But I own it, won't deny it, and will never stop loving the aesthetic of a cool ass looking terminal.
However.
Seeing as the author chose to focus on editors, I'll do the same: I have never found an editor that is all together _better_ than neovim. Sure, this is probably still subjective, whatever, but putting aesthetics and feelings and whatever else aside, neovim still always wins for me and it's not even close. The speed, the stability, the power of a well-configured LSP, the navigation afforded by things like fzf and treesitter, the unbelievably rich and forward-thinking plugin community, and so on and so forth, make it come out on top time and time again for me. Many, if not most, of these reasons are rational.
I could say similar things about most of the other apps (cli-based and otherwise, though most are cli-based) that I use, as well.
The author also seems to misunderstand that the so-called "cult" of Emacs might exist for more than just superficial reasons. Perhaps a "cult" formed around it because it's actually really good, or at least addressed a lot of people's problems at a particular time, and groups of people tend to form their own aesthetic? I myself have never jived with Emacs, but I can certainly recognize the power of it -- and, yes, the aesthetic, community, etc -- and I certainly wouldn't dream of shitting on someone's joy of it, especially in a condescending "you actually only like this because you think it looks cool" or "it confirms some aspect of yourself" way.
It's simple: we can, and probably even should, choose tools for both rational and "superficial" reasons. It's perfectly fine, and one aspect does not negate the other.
I agree. I primarily use Emacs, because I think it’s just about the greatest program mankind’s ever developed. Anything you could ever possibly want it to do is already packaged for it. It supports all the features of newer editors (yes, I said all of them). It supports every language known to humanity, and it does it consistently so that if you use it to write Python, you know how to use it to write Rust or Prolog or C.
I don’t use Emacs to be contrary, just like you don’t use Neovim for that reason. We use them because they’re really good.
Some people can use Emacs for amazing productivity gains, and some just can't, no matter how much they try. The first ones are blessed, the seconds ones are inferior and better to stay away from.
It is Gnostic cult, even if it happens to be true.
Thank you. I very simply cannot and will not "play the game." I refuse to lay down and accept that the majority of my day's interactions will be laced with bullshit. Every time I have, my spirit has plummeted to dangerous lows; every time I've fought against it, even if it's worked against me (and it definitely has), the lift to my spirits has carried me to a better place.
Rather than giving in to it, I've taken it as a signal that something needs to change -- I'm surrounded by the wrong people, in a business with bad market fit (a root cause of this kind of toxic culture that isn't talked about enough IMO), etc. Sometimes a good place has just rotted. Like entropy, I don't think this sort of thing can be reversed once it's set in.
I recently interviewed with a great company full of great folks, and I was given the chance to frankly but firmly (and slightly humorously in a gallows humor sort of way) state precisely why I was leaving my last company; in fact, I used it as part of the interview where I interview them. This section of the interview went well, because as far as I could tell, these people are smart, down-to-earth, no bullshit, and appreciate living in the truth. They're a small company, so people can't hide behind bullshit as easily. I much prefer that.
The cognitive dissonance displayed all over this thread and tendency to hand-wave it away by painting anything that isn't playing along as not understanding social cues, lacking tact, etc, makes me sick. The whole culture is childish, literally -- it reeks of the particular brand of lack of accountability, tendency to gaslight, and so on that is displayed by children. When coming out of a 4-year-old's mouth, it's easy to disarm and work around and excuse, almost cute in its ineffectiveness; when coming out of a company, as a matter of policy, it's authoritarian and frightening.
I really, really can't stand it. The good people are out there, however.
Really glad to see that someone has started on a Mac package manager written in Rust.
A couple purely superficial suggestions (echoing some other comments here):
- Lose the Brew terminology, especially if the name of the project isn't a synonym of "brew."
- Change the name in general. "Sapphire" makes me think of "Ruby." IMO the obvious name is MacPac :p
Side-note: what theme are you using in the linked gif? It's right in the middle of my two favorite themes, onedark and gruvbox.
reply