Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | codesnik's commentslogin

nowadays you can vibecode some half-ass headless browser automation using your email-password or even weird corporate sso.

That is exactly what i did last week. Got praised for it.

but why solar system is so out of scale?

Because it’s more cool and important.

Honestly, I'm biased but I think it's the best one.

The damp rock is pretty and compatible with life. 10/10 would inhabit again.

I'm interested in how you're planning on managing the "again" part.

Oh I have no clue how to do that, but if I can no question this damp rock is top of my list.

Human-centric thinking.

git's mental model is very, very small, if you care to learn it. Then all the commands and their "inconsistencies" start to make sense - they operate on the model almost without any magic, and not on whatever is user's intent (it can vary a lot)

I've tried to come up with the reason they don't do it, and thought MAYBE they were afraid people would put PINs for the cards there and they thought it's a bad idea. I wonder why I even tried to invent a good reason for them, designers could just lack perspective and do not care at all, even in apple.


Why would you save the PIN? It’s not required when doing Wallet transactions - it uses Face ID or similar.


contactless ATMs


good for you and your particular bank.


give me ability to write a damn whatever on the card. My bank provides USD, EUR and other currencies on different cards with exact same cover. Maddening.

I can imagine that we don't have this option just because people would put their PINs there, and maybe it's not exactly secure enough, but sprinkle some validation on top and we'd be ok.


which is much better than nothing, but is a fairly recent addition


huh, I've never thought to check my github id. I don't remember myself being an early adopter.


i think it is the other way around. Git is pretty simple internally, and its ui is just knobs and levers to reach into that simple reliable internal structure. This is why for some people it seems like a mess - they want button "do what I want" (and all people and their needs are different), and for other people it's clean - open the throttle, engine will rev.


Agree, the insides are fairly simple and cleanly designed, you could explain exactly how almost everything works in a 1 hour presentation, and most people will grok the main ideas fairly easily.

The tooling on top is inconsistent and kind of messy though, and harder to explain than the internals. I recall hearing somewhere that the tooling we see today as the user tooling was really supposed to just be the tooling for messing with git directly, with the expectation that something would sit above and make it actually user-friendly. I don't remember where I recall this from though, so could be just a post-justification from my own brain to explain the situation :)


It’s more about using them to present a better interface for your workflow and the project.


> Git is pretty simple internally, and its ui is just knobs and levers to reach into that simple reliable internal structure.

that's not true either. originally it was simple internally - it was mostly shell scripts! writing text files! - but now it has all sorts of complicated optimisations.

the "middle" is somewhat simple for CS people, though - a graph of commits, you can put labels on them, you can send and receive strict appends to the graph to another repository. both the stuff under and above that is quite complicated in practice, but the UI does continue to improve - e.g. editing a past commit message until the release last week was ... complicated.


> editing a past commit message until the release last week was ... complicated

Was it? ‘git log —-oneline’ to figure the commit id if it’s not really recent. ‘git rebase -i <commit-id>^’ and then apply the reword action to your commit.


strange. Some keyboard shortcuts in os x are kinda weird and not intuitive to linux or windows users, but they are there. It's totally possible to use mac without trackpad. even cmd+tab switcher has a lot of hidden (but googlable) things: while still holding cmd after initial cmd+tab, you can close apps with q, switch to other apps with tab and (cmd+)shift+tab or left/right arrows, show app windows with down, etc. There's also a cmd+` for switching between one app's windows. I still find that distinction weird from usability perspective, but it's not too hard to adapt to it.


> totally possible to use mac without trackpad

As I discover every time I have a mouse fail, it is exceptionally difficult to use a modern Mac without a pointer device because at some point, it became quite difficult to get from (eg) the settings nav panel to the settings panel. I can CMD+SPACE to open spotlight, type 'Settings' to get to a settings panel, type 'Bluetooth' to open the bluetooth settings, and where I feel like I _should_ be able to `Tab` or `Enter` into the devices list, or have SOME way to navigate over there, the only way I've found to be able to is to plug in a physical mouse

Moreover, I occasionally encounter modals that won't let me tab to their action buttons, requiring a pointer device click to dismiss


Take a peek in the accessibility settings - there is a setting for keyboard navigation that defaults to Off - setting jt On should let you navigate those items


huh. I just did what you describe above (on tahoma) and was able to tab into the list of bluetooth devices, no problem.

do you have "Settings > Keyboard > Keyboard navigation" on? I thought it is on by default, but apparently it isn't. Without it "tab" only jumps between text fields and checkboxes.

There's also an "Accessibility > Keyboard > Full keyboard access", which gives more controls.


It was indeed not on by default

I appreciate the tip! I'm going to have to put that in an Ansible playbook


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: