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

I agree it’s not the prettiest, but I had no trouble clicking on “tree” to get to the folder and then “mod.ts” to see the code.


One has still to know that "tree" stands for "source code".


That seems like... a normal thing to know?

Pre-GitHub, one of the most popular web git viewers (cgit) used "tree" in this way. Never found that to be confusing.

(In git, the listing of the files and directories at a particular commit is called a "tree". So it's correct. Just not as intuitive as you, personally, would like.)


Well it doesn't stand for "source code". It's the tree of directories and files.


This is not a sourcehut problem, it is a github problem. "Tree" is semantically correct.


What? Of course it's a Sourcehut problem. They chose to use that word and could choose to use a better one.


Tree has been used for this kind of thing for decades now.


So what? There are still better words for it.


Note that, in the abstract, “vulgar” means “common” (as in “vulgar latin”). Indeed, its negative connotations come from that same sense: “common” people are unrefined.


The association between vulgarity and propriety (and class distinctions) sort of ruins that word, particularly in the english speaking west.

I wonder if that's as big of a problem in the romance languages (which all treat left/right the same way - left = bad, right = good)


Yes, in Spanish vulgar is used as inappropriate. We have "el vulgo" (el pueblo, the people), which kinda teaches you the correct meaning, popular, unrefined. But "vulgo" is seldomly used.


Indeed: are you sinister or dexterous?


As a left-handed contrarian, I’ve always enjoyed that sinister and left handed go hand in hand.


In French the same word for “right” means the same notion in English for

- direction

- straight ahead

- civics

- propriety


This goes pretty deep in English. I'd argue that the semantic intention behind the colloquial usage of "vulgar" is nearly inseparable from the "class distinction" baggage it carries. Consider these common synonyms and their etymologies:

- Rude: "coarse, rough, unfinished, unlearned" (https://www.etymonline.com/word/rude#etymonline_v_16610)

- Mean: "shared by all, common, general" (https://www.etymonline.com/word/mean#etymonline_v_12495)

And even synonyms like obscene, indecent, or disgusting, which don't evoke this distinction directly, still almost always ultimately rely on separating things based on what is "good" and "clean" according to class distinctions.


Am I missing something about the O(logN) section? Why is there a graph of O(n^3 logN) under the text Here is how logarithmic complexity look like?


I know this isn’t truly the point of the article, but I’d encourage anyone/everyone to give https://fork.dev a try. Unlimited free trial but well worth it to support the great devs. It solves basically all of the ergonomic gripes I have with the `git` CLI.


I love Fork and use it a lot, though I’d say for any Git GUI you should still build a solid understanding of the fundamentals to use it effectively.

I’m not implying this was the point you’re making at all, but imo a Git GUI should be for aiding visualisation and to avoid needing to type the (sometimes unintuitive) commands rather than to avoid learning Git itself. I think this is what causes many people to get stuck.



In case anyone is looking for a desktop app to replace Authy, the authy-migration tool from token2 supports exporting TOTP seeds in WinAuth compatible format (use .wa.txt for export file name). Then in WinAuth (https://winauth.github.io/winauth/index.html) , just import that file.


I have a rooted Android phone and with a simple su and cp I copied the Authy XML to another folder which you can import into the app Aegis directly (from there you can export further if you don't like Aegis). I'm currently looking at Ente Auth because it's end2end encrypted and also provides a web UI for viewing the codes. Or I use another Keepass file.


I used this and it worked very well. Not perfectly.

Because Authy doesn't have icons for a lot of services, I stored info as twitter:username, google:username, etc. The script dropped about the service name on about 10 of those, just showing the username.

I "imported" the list of QR codes into 2FAS by using my iPhone's camera. Where there wasn't a service, it would say "Service 1", "Service 2", etc.

I then went back through with 2FAS on one device and Authy on another, matching the "Service 1" to "Bubble", for example, because the TOTP codes were the same.

The one service that didn't seem to transfer was Facebook, which I have in Authy but didn't show up in the QR code list.

Several codes in Authy were duplicates, meaning that service:username was the same. 2FAS asked if I wanted to overwrite them. #1, I don't think Authy should allow the same string more than once and #2, again, a simple alphabetization would make maintaining and using Authy more agreeable.


Actually, it looks like Authy will show "twitter:username" in the compact list but doesn't show that (just "username") on the icon view unless I'd manually added them. So it wasn't stripping service names, I hadn't added them.

Still puzzled about why Facebook wasn't transferred.

I have found Authy to be reliable and I like having the TOTP codes on multiple devices. I have a powered-off iPhone at a friend's as one way to access my codes. I don't like the apathy that Twilio has shown it and I don't like the inability to export.


Nice find!


At the risk of correcting the primary source, I was able to load https://www.ebiester.com/ but not https://ebiester.com/

EDIT: I see you’ve already updated your comment. Thanks!


Xcode used to have native support for this, long ago. And it had mdns support too!


The wikipedia page[0] has screenshots.

[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twm


This is cool. Although when I looked through the code I thought, “surely there must be a general-purpose Hayes command library for Python”, so I searched around, and didn’t find anything. Kinda wild.


The first amendment is mostly about what the US government can/can’t do, and even then it’s not 100% protection.


I'll rephrase: the First Amendment generally prohibits the government from dictating what you can or cannot serve from your webserver, does it not?


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

Search: