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

Zed pretty much copied everything over from Sublime, so it's pretty much on par. Sublime was one of the first editors to have an uncluttered UI without toolbars, but with advanced features, like multi-cursor editing and the command palette. As a long time sublime users, it still feels superior as it gets lots of small details right, like for example when I do Cmd+P to search for files and scroll through the files it will show a preview, Zed doesn't show a preview until you actually select the file.

cough textmate

Yup, I used TextMate a lot back in the early 2000s, and Sublime from around 2010 and bought a license maybe a year later.

To this day I always install Sublime on my new machines, it's the perfect text editor for my needs: fast and snappy, buffers are persistent so I can use as a scratch pad without having to save files, can customise with plugins if needed, the command palette gives quite a bit of power user features.

I mostly use it as a scratch pad nowadays, like if I'm debugging something, collecting a bunch of text from different places to reference quickly, nothing too advanced (nor directly related to coding) and is still one of the most satisfying programs to use on my day-to-day. It's basically always open, just waiting for a new buffer.


Technically correct. However, for the majority of humans, their first encounter with these features and behaviors could never be TextMate, and instead would be Sublime Text. TextMate never growing to be cross-platform is a major reason for Sublime Text's early growth.

no, their first exposure was bbedit

I use Sublime mostly these days but I still have a soft spot for TextMate. Sublime is the closest that exists to its spiritual successor, but it’s missing the “macness” that TextMate brought back in the day, which is the cost of being a cross-platform app I suppose.

Sublime was an evolution from TextMate. They even used the TM file formats for snippets and language syntax iirc.

But what is the point of the background then? I mean, it seems like we're admitting that the design doesn't matter, then why keep up the ruse? Let's drop design, and keep just plain textual information. There is no substance to it, it's just performative, a simulacrum of design.

I would think to catch people's eye so they look in the first place, sort of similar to an ad. Which is also why we see AI slop work well in ads. And before AI slop, we had corpo slop. Just bright colors and wacky animated characters who all fit that archetype where their limbs are too big. So I do think the design takes a back seat, at least for the common case. Of course there are exceptions, and those exceptions are exceptional, but for most purposes slop works fine.

I tried to set up something similar, photos and videos on local NAS + cloud storage. Also with data loss, eg. I don't sync any large RAW camera files to cloud. I clone my local machine with CCC onto an external drive, that way it should be easy to just restore the last state onto a new machine. So I think it's archival storage for media vs snapshots of your working setup so you can restore quickly.

They do transfer, but it's not automatic.

My Nikon ZF transfers to my phone through Nikon's SnapBridge app automatically.

Oh, that's cool, kudos to Nikon, could be a good reason to switch over from Fuji.

I also have the same fuji. Digital cameras are still in the stone ages. I think Tony Northrup covered it well. Nothing has changed since digital cameras came to market, the workflow is still the same, copy files from a card to PC. They aren't connected to the internet, they don't have automatic syncing to cloud for backups or sharing, fuji doesn't even have a gps chip built in to store the location (only works if connected to a smartphone), they can't be locked via fingerprint scanner. It's all tech from 25 years ago.

In some senses it's good. That feature list just says "use a smartphone then". No thank you. It's everything that a camera should not be.

GPS is useful, but not wifi. I don't need my camera becoming another IOT always online telemetry device. They're one of the few electronic devices built to last. Imagine needing fingerprint unlock on a camera, and for what? Prevent others from viewing your photos? Changing your settings? Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow. Imagine cameras like smartphone with no expandable storage.

Stop giving these people ideas! I am now very afraid they will listen to this guy since he actually has a follower base.


Looks like someone is hurt in the SD card slot, hah.

why do you assume a functionality will obligatory be abused against the client?

pro camera manufacturers are not google or apple. Have we became that defeatist?


Unfortunately, your comment reminds me that car manufactures aren't Google or Apple either, and still it seems that modern, high-end cars have a tendency of collecting more than what's needed for the car to remain in good shape or be diagnosed. I guess we became so defeatist when more and more companies started realizing they could make extra profit by collecting data from their customers.

Of course they are google and apple. They are in an even more monopolisticaly and gov enabled market!

just look at the chinese import ban on both mobile phones and cars!


> Also copy from card to pc is the best possible workflow

So turn off the camera, open the memory card slot cover which is flimsy 1mm prong, eject the card, insert it in the reader (if you have SD reader) or fiddle the microSD first from the convertor and then insert, copy, (insert microSD to SD convertor), open up slot cover, insert the card.

Surely beats just connecting the camera to the WiFi (which it does have anyway) and downloading through SMB. Suuure.

S9900 from 15 years ago had a built-in GPS receiver (and absolutely unneeded and never updated POI system). P1100 needs a smartphone for GPS for whatever reason - and app doesn't work 5 times from 5. But the latter is on me, I knew what I would get when I bought Nikon.


Cameras had gps for a moment but they all dropped it because it sucks. GPS takes a long time to get a fix so unless you want to turn the camera on and sit for 5 minutes before taking the photo, it doesn’t work. Meanwhile an app on your phone can ping the current location to the camera for free. Your phone always has a location lock and it’s super power efficient at getting it.

And the rest of it is essentially features for a market that doesn’t exist. People buying cameras today don’t want to send straight to Facebook. They want to sort through raws, edit in Lightroom and then post from a laptop. The market for the features you want all moves to phones long ago.

Sony also has a bunch of the features you are asking for. It can connect to the internet and live sync files to an ftp server. It can even upload proxy videos so your editors can start work before you get back to copy the master copy over. Cameras are sold to prosumers and actual professionals now so the featureset reflects it.


> Your phone always has a location lock and it’s super power efficient at getting it.

So why can't cameras do it? They are the same form factor, could be a feature to enable. My smart garmin instinct can track gps for a day, and it's a tiny sportswatch.


Because they don’t have internet access to download the gps almanac or ping the apple/google servers to ask where the wifi ap they saw is located. And they aren’t always on so they have to get the gps fix from scratch rather than maintaining it which is faster.

Sure you could put a mobile modem and internet connectivity on a camera, but it adds price, reduces battery life, and doesn’t really have any advantages over a phone companion app


> People buying cameras today don’t want to send straight to Facebook.

Pretty sure that's the main point of Fuji camera, the output and built it filter is decent enough that you can upload to Social network without any editing.


I'd think even the JPEG shooters still prefer to sort through the results on a computer and don't need to fire off instagram posts direct from the camera. At any rate, most cameras these days have a companion app that let you grab the photos from your phone without pulling out an SD card.

Windows OS is also stone age. There is no simple way to list all user data, or user edited system data for simple backup in readable format.

Btw X100F has Wi-Fi and automated file transfer to PC. But it is faster to transfer it via SD card.


I actually prefer this workflow, although GPS would be a nice addition.

In case this eases your pain, there exists SD cards with integrated WiFi for ease of data transfer.

For digital media we really need a good stable archival storage solution. Nothing on the market right now for ordinary people.

There's plenty of backup services and cloud solutions. The article mentions Borg and Restic, others like Backblaze are more consumer friendly. Which needs do you have that aren't met by any of these tools?

Backups are not archival storage. If you stop paying for service, say goodbye to your data.

I'm using Backblaze, but as a Kopia repository.

> backup services and cloud solutions

online backup should not be your primary method of backup, you're one billing, identity theft, financial issue, or health issue away from getting your backup nuked

do you have PBS clout? if not good luck https://arstechnica.com/information-technology/2026/08/pbs-s...


PBS's situation is entirely PBS fault. If you've got 50TB of data to backup it's either worth $300 to $400 a month to you to do it properly with a reputable vendor along with on-site storage, or ... just accept you'll lose it.

It was such a tremendously silly decision I almost wonder if it wasn't a politically motivated decision. Maybe the provider that went under had some relative DEI points versus Backblaze or AWS. Just bizarre.

But I wouldn't extrapolate anything out from their situation.


Online only is fine as an actual backup, presuming you have the primary in your control.

It shouldn’t be the only copy of the data that exists.


Something is better than nothing. I accidentally spilled liquid on my macbook just the other day. It's still in the shop. Luckily, I periodically clone my drive with CCC onto a single external SSD. Don't wait to set up the perfect backup solution, just have a copy of your data in more than one place, that's a good start imho.

Why doesn't it return on the first match?


Because it would always return the first match in that case.

You still need to see all of the items once.

Imagine you have 2 items.

First one has 100% chance to be selected. So it does. Then the second has 50% chance to be selected. If it isn’t you effectively chosen the first one and have 50/50 chance to return either.

Now you add a third item. There is 50/50 chance of having either selected. And 1/3 chance of replacing the selection with the new one. Resulting in a 1/3 chance of selecting any of the three. (Because 1/2-1/6 = 1/3) 1/6 because there is 50% chance you will “steal” the selection.


Thank you for writing this out, I didn't quite get what was going on at first. But then, to formalize the recursion from your example: let's assume we're at item n in the iterator, and at that point we've selected a winner from the previous n-1 items with equal probability, i.e. each item had a 1/(n-1) chance of being selected. The probability that item n will override it is 1/n. The probability that the old winner will remain selected is thus (n-1)/n. That means that the old winner remains selected with probability 1/(n-1) * (n-1)/n, which cancels out to 1/n, so each item is indeed selected with equal probability in the end.


An alternative wording for the same idea:

If you are at picture 1, you have 100% chance of selecting it as the current winner.

If you are at picture 2, you have 1/2 chance of selecting it as the current winner, or 1/2 chance of keeping the previous fairly selected winner.

At picture 3, 1/3 chance of picking it, or 2/3 chance of retaining the previous fairly-selected winner. There are two of them, so 1/3 chance of each.

At picture n, you have a 1/n chance of picking it, or an (n-1)/n chance of retaining the previous fairly-selected winner. There are n-1 previous pictures, so all of them have had 1/n chance of being picked.

At every single step, there is the invariant of all pictures being considered that far having had an equal chance of being selected, and the next step always retains the invariant.


This feels very analogous to the three doors puzzle.


Oh, I understand, should've examined more carefully, the count starts at 0 and increments, so random is not from the total but from the elements counted so far.


exactly. There is something wrong with the code snippet.


No there is not. First element is defacto winner, but you still have to loop through the rest with 1/n chance of being selected to fully give each element a chance of winner selection


Yeah I think the "wrong feeling" is just that this could, in theory, be O(1) with something like:

  pics[Math.random() * len(pics)]
... assuming that random() gives you a number from 0..1 - but that's why it feels "wrong".


The len(pics) can be O(n), especially if iterators are used like here. Also, an O(1) lookup would require a previous O(n) pass over the data anyway.

The picture selection algorithm's kind of single-pass iterator usage might have been more performant back in the XP days, as it avoids possibly expensive operations.

Modern CPU/other optimizations might make a multi-pass approach more performant due to better memory locality or other factors.


len(pics) either already knows about the length or it needs to count so it’s O(n)


On count == 1, the winner gets set to the first element, true. But the function does not return yet! So the value might get overwritten during the remainder of the for-loop.


I re-examined it, the count changes, that's why it works. The random is not between 1 and total, it's between 1 and current count.


I think this type of generated content has the same role as illustrations or newspaper caricatures in the past. It doesn't need to be true, it just needs to express a particular viewpoint.


Not only the bass buttons, there is a type of chromatic button accordion, popular in eastern europe.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R2Z4iPyFmAE


And then there are diatonic accordions, which all use a similar layout both for the bass and melody sides (but you can't play in all keys[0] on them, that's the difference between chromatic and diatonic). While they are simpler than chromatic accordions, they are now usually more expensive because fewer people play them.

[0] that is, ~"scales"; usually all buttons will be working


I can't find it now but a while back on R*dd*t /r/synthesizers there was a diatonic Korg Triton that someone had clearly had custom made - possibly from the guts of a diatonic MIDI accordion, not sure.

It looked pretty slick, not the usual homebrewed raggy-edge crap. Someone had clearly spent quite a lot of money on getting *exactly* what they wanted.


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

Search: