terminalPoltergeist

Trailing whitespace is the root of all evil..

my contrarian first-principles take after 1 month in sf: - taste is the new bottleneck - being high agency is orthogonal to credentials - the only non-trivial leverage left is shifting the overton window stochastically via the irl connection economy.

@vivoplt If you’re asking if you should drop your code editor and go full agent harness you’re ngmi

anyone here still using VS Code or has everyone switched to Claude Code or Codex?

@yacineMTB hey don’t rope MN into this, we’re still trying to figure it out

Weed in the 70s: you get a little goofy like it's light beer Weed in 2026: using a precision dropper to take 5 drops of hyper concentrated pure liquid thc extracted from Chronic Neural Destroyer Crystal Meth Kush 9000 invented in the Minnesota State university botany lab

@ibuildthecloud I would say the same except for nvim. I don’t maintain my config anymore, I vibe code it. No longer spending hours per year fixing config, just prompt when something breaks and move on.

I'm not really sure we need anything more than vscode as an IDE at this point. I care less about an IDE and vscode does all the things and is infinitely customizable and super easy to extend.

@DanielSmidstrup Retrieval Augmented Generation

Name a thing you'd never let AI do for you.

@BecomingCritter Purging low-effort technical debt

I've been feeling so run down. Is there anything that took you from feeling low energy and lethargic to feeling, yknow, alive?

GitHub if GitHub made it

To the question directly, I agree the two mentioned product domains shouldn’t be combined. ex. Blacksmith for CI makes sense. I get the “keep CI close to the code”, but when that results in a worse product overall, it’s a better experience to have the integration. GitHub should focus on what can’t be outsourced; the open source communities, codebase management.

I have a draft blog post swirling around this exact topic (but not refined enough to publish yet). I think the key thing is I (personally) don't want a NEW GitHub. I want GitHub to be better. For example: - GitHub issues should be as beautiful and good as Linear - GitHub PRs should be as good as Graphite - GitHub Git infra should be as fast/minimal as Pierre - GitHub wikis should be more like Notion - GitHub discussions & shouldn't exist (multiple "better issue" providers including Linear show why) - etc. I'm not saying to clone those full companies outright, but their core product, arguably the core features, aren't even 2% as good as those external products. Maybe aim for 10% to start. There's the "oh no there's so much tech debt" argument. And I'm sure GH is on an absolutely mountain of tech debt. That's why in my prior twoots I've argued to just make them separate products to start only for agility reasons, unapologetically do not integrate with "old github." Net net startups beat encumbants all the time for reasons. That's just a product/technical POV though. GitHub also has a huge PR/marketing problem. They talk through corp speak, their marketing pages (e.g. the dot com) speaks to multiple personas confusingly, they have no singular visionary to look up or trust, they have nobody who makes the outward community feel seen. There's so much more here... I think for the human side, GitHub already has what it needs to be really, really, really good. It really feels like they just like fearless vision, and the courage/power to say "fuck you" to a whole lot of things that are distracting them.

What is unclear to me is what people actually want some new GitHub to be. To me, the biggest challenge GitHub has always had is that it is trying to serve two very different worlds. On one side, it is a social network around code and open source. On the other, it is infrastructure for companies building software. Those two groups operate almost in opposite ways, so the product has always been some kind of compromise between them. Because those users are so far apart, it can fail both of them in different ways. Inside a company, you mostly just want to review and merge code. You are not discovering new code, and you are probably not forking things. You may have a monorepo, a known team, and a trusted environment. What you want from GitHub is efficiency and safety: PRs, review, ownership, CI, Actions, tests, security checks, and a clear path to getting code merged. Open source is different. It is much more public and much less trusted. You need better ways to figure out who is contributing, what to accept, how to manage the project, how to handle issues, and how to maintain trust with people you may not know. So are people asking for a new open source code hosting and social network, or do they want better private infrastructure for software teams? Or both? I would never choose to build both from the start. I think every product gets better when it is more purpose-built and designed around a specific need. You could maybe imagine some nested model, where private repos have a much simpler and more focused mode, but you can still exit that mode and browse around the public space.

@obsdmd TUI eventually @kepano?

@dillon_mulroy Were you the guy behind me Friday flying into Palm Springs that sighed very loudly after I leaned my seat back??

if you lean your seat back on a non-international flight you're dead to me

@kitlangton Is this AI generated??

GitHub if it were just some rocks

Vibe coders hate: - Rust - Docker - AWS console - Smart contracts - Payment integration -Debugging production issues Vibe coders love: - Next.js - No sign in - Supabase - Vercel deployment - Brutalism & shadcn/ui -Ship fast

But tbh I feel like recessions, bubbles, all futuristic betting is a self-defeating prophecy.

“Recession indicator” but “bubble indicator”

@JesusGodAndKing nah we good

@thekitze “Make Mac more like Windows, no mistakes”

macOS 27 leak, clean af

@webdevcody What happened to this? lol I know the struggle is real. x.com/webdevcody/sta…

I finally hit the wall, even opus 4.7 max couldn't solve it

I've been doom scrolling GitHub issues since before that was a word.

@theo better than giving Scottie Pippen access to Mythos

the “as code” in “infrastructure as code” sucks. it implies you can articulate your infrastructure using software design patterns. in reality it’s just a structureless heap of names being passed around. alas, it’s the best we’ve got and so it is what we must use.