I don't really get the idea of needing converts when nixpkgs is basically the largest and most up to date.. Using another Linux as a system engineer you would certainly know how to build outside the package system because you would have to.
The point is that, from my perspective, the value proposition rapidly diminishes when you start needing to special case things to live inside the nixos configuration world.
Other people might be getting different benefits.
(Really this is just the configuration file vs language conflict, again. Oh, this is too complicated, make a config file, oh my config file can't express this special case lets add language features, why am I using a config language instead of a read language, oh this real language is too complicated...)
LLMs change this since you can get them to create a wrapper for some software you want based on a hash, and then bump it when you want to update it.
The end goal is that you have a reproducible, immutable build contained in some git-diffed config files which is all I want.
And it becomes especially nice when you have a single repo that configures all the machines you use, from your macOS laptop to your remote servers, with common config/programs shared between them.
Whether anyone else offers a nix/flake/HM version of their software barely moves the needle on utility of this setup.
Sure, I generally didn't go very granular in things not meant for much distribution and then got somewhat less benefit (at least a condensed collection of the system's freakish config is in one source), but trying to go to that granularity level in other Linux I'd have to hope it was network related so editing network manager might be enough and then well, I'd still not follow through since that's maybe 18 months of babysitting for a small chance if the thing isn't obscure.
It would be frustrating, but the group that is excluded from online services today tends to be low status and may benefit greatly when a tech elite with connections, status and special interest groups finds itself excluded.
If you have coworkers or other priorities it's sometimes preferable to have the option to have a hand held at some tasks or incidents rather than making sure someone competent read all the documentation pertaining to some irreversible command lines. You can try to treat a LLM as that hand holding but it can be a psychophantic member of group think while a checkbox stays a stable checkbox.
I think the whole trackpad idea is stupid and unusable (like anything that needs software correction for physical layout idiocy) and I blame Apple for its prevalence. Apple could make an entirely worthless product and within 4 years everyone would have to copy it.
Agreed… but really only for macs. That’s where it’s beautiful.
I even use their larger external trackpad with the mini. But on work supplied machines and such I use a conventional mouse.
It’s not even because everyone else's trackpads are fucking garbage (they are). It’s that systems that aren’t macs just weren’t built around using one.
Some of the slightly-less-trashy bits of 3rd party software try to bridge the gap, but it’s not the same.
> It’s not even because everyone else's trackpads are fucking garbage (they are). It’s that systems that aren’t macs just weren’t built around using one.
Not to support the idea that good touchpad is apple’s monopoly, but I and most people I know stop having wrist pains by giving up the mouse. If we’re talking about a stupid idea that’s both inefficient and a health hazard, the mouse is it. All the other pointing devices (trackball, trackpoint, rolling mouse etc) make sense one way or another
Needing a 3rd hand for a peripheral is naturally a flawed idea. The only
reason I prefer the mouse over the palm trackpad is because it can't interfere
while probably still having to use it occasionally. The track point and
trackball were better interfaces than both but they weren't a great platform
for making Apple look innovative.
the 3rd hand wasn't event what I meant by inefficient, it more that you need an extra surface to move some pointer and do the least possible amount of HCI data transfer. It's so... lame in this age of mobiliy
I'm not sure about the overall argument.. But I think arthritis of the fingers manifests eventually for most people who work with their hands and finger movement combined with any compression on tendons exacerbates carpal tunnel syndrome. Ergonomic I/O makers are essentially experimenting on the population, but less ethically as their bias is in using a bunch of nonsense to further a dialogue that supports whichever patents they obtained.
Personally I don't believe anything requiring 3 hands could be adequately tested given the freedom of movement given to the subject. I think only 2 hand home row keyboard use with specific additional positioning requirements has a flake of scientific rigour. (This is why I could only honestly support the track pointer in the home row as the least risky of the choices as it is the smallest deviation from something with a foundation.)
I think we are hung up on an incorrectly simplified calculation.
If China produces a cell phone and takes labor and raw materials
costs and a bunch of IP holders and stock holders then take the
majority of the sales price then China supposedly has a major
trade surplus. This incorrect measurement has probably been a
driver in China ensuring it gets everything it can out of
anything that will be measured as part of its surplus which
means competing with foreign brands made in China as quickly as
possible. Eventually this should mean trying to limit the exports of
Chinese companies that have foreign investors.
I agree with the over simplified calculation. People have been going on about Germany and China having a surplus and the US a deficit for dunno 40 years saying it can't work but why not? If someone in the US wants a Merc and the Germans take Anthropic shares in exchange who cares?
