There are absolutely things wrong with that, because React was designed to solve problems that don't exist in a TUI.

React fixes issues with the DOM being too slow to fully re-render the entire webpage every time a piece of state changes. That doesn't apply in a TUI, you can re-render TUIs faster than the monitor can refresh. There's no need to selectively re-render parts of the UI, you can just re-render the entire thing every time something changes without even stressing out the CPU.

It brings in a bunch of complexity that doesn't solve any real issues beyond the devs being more familiar with React than a TUI library.

It is demonstrably absolutely fine. Sheesh.

I would still call that small, maybe medium. emacs is huge as far as CLI tools go, awk is large because it implements its own language (apparently capable of writing Doom in). `top` probably has a similar number of interaction points, something like `lftp` might have more between local and remote state.

The complex and magic parts are around finding contextual things to include, and I'd be curious how many are that vs "forgot to call clear() in the TUI framework before redirecting to another page".

The ads will be awful, because you’re effectively captive. You only control the volume and screen if they let you.

Finally, a justification for owning an Apple Vision Pro.

I don’t even think that’s rational, but it may be what’s propping them up.

Last earnings call Musk said Optimus wasn’t doing “meaningful work” at Tesla and as far as I’m aware they haven’t done meaningful work anywhere. I think they’re behind the curve there. Figure AI recently finished an apparently successful feasibility trial of their humanoid robots with BMW and Boston Dynamics has a deal with Hyundai for their Atlas humanoid robots.

I’m not even convinced humanoid robots are going to pan out in general. They only really make sense in a scenario where you’re back porting robotics to factories built for humans. That has value but feels temporary; factories designed to be robotic feel like the future, and there’s no need for them to do the job the same way a human would.

Our world is adapted for humans, so humanoid robots will fit in most places. They might not be the best choice, but the universality has a good chance of making it worth it through economies of scale.

Building a custom robot that can stock shelves at a supermarket won't be worth it for a long time, but programming an existing humanoid platform might work. Find a couple hundred tasks like this (including household use), and that platform now has huge economies of scale.

Now, when you're starting a small factory, using the existing humanoids might make more sense than getting custom tooling, at least for some tasks. You'll often see factories where some tasks that could, in theory, be automated are left to humans because they're relatively small tasks and not worth automating with a custom machine. Humanoids could fill that gap.

> Building a custom robot that can stock shelves at a supermarket won't be worth it for a long time, but programming an existing humanoid platform might work.

This feels inverted to me, but perhaps I’m reading it wrong. A lot of the core challenges are shared, but the humanoid has to solve a bunch of additional challenges. Eg balancing is difficult with moving loads of various weights. Humanoids have to deal with that, while something more forklift-like practically opts out of that issue by just being designed with a high mass and low center of gravity.

I don’t see a universe where a humanoid is ever cheaper, but I could maybe see it generalizing well enough for usage to make it worth it. I’d still be a bit surprised, because operating costs would surely be higher (way more servos or hydraulics to fail, higher power usage hauling around unnecessary parts and weight).

This seems doubly true for factories where opex is so much more meaningful than capex. It’s worth spending $4M on custom tooling rather than $2M on generic tooling if it drops your opex by $500k/year on a factory with a 20 year lifespan.

>I’m not even convinced humanoid robots are going to pan out in general.

I want one personally, so it can rake the leaves, mow the lawn, tend the garden, do the laundry and dishes, replace the roof, etc., when I'm old. But they should also be used to pick up litter along the highway, paint over graffiti, etc..

I absolutely do too, I’m just not convinced a single humanoid robot is going to do the job cheaper and better than a dozen purpose-built robots (which you might own, or might rent from Home Depot or whatever when the need arises).

Eg lawn mowing robots already exist, and have for a decade or so. Garden tending also exists, though I think only commercial prototypes at the current moment. Roofing feels very possible, but I only roofed once so ymmv.

Is the future going to be buying a humanoid robot with a thousand servos for $100,000, or texting a number to have a self-driving car drop off a bladed roomba made from bargain bin brushless motors and plastic to mow your lawn for $0.50?

It'd almost certainly need at least two hands, and I'm sure there are a lot of people who would pay to automate the remaining 5% of the dishes.

And the two-handed spot will have a hard time grabbing something under the sofa.

For dishes and clothes? Zero hands required, you can use a vacuum to pick them up and maneuver them (inverting the air flow to drop them).

A buddy demo-ed something from work doing exactly that like a decade ago, but it was commercial and designed for an assembly line.

I _think_ these are meant to replace humans working alongside the industrial robots rather than the big industrial robots themselves. I don’t work in manufacturing though, and the press releases are too buzzword-y for me to grasp the actual tasks they’re going to do.

I would guess the long term strategy is to do this for economies of scale and then push into new markets opened up by the lower price point. I would guess these are horribly expensive right now, given something like Spot is way simpler and still like $40k

this is something that also never made sense to me - it felt like star wars got it right - for repairs and remedial tasks a trash can (rs-d2) or all the little service droids are more appropriate, but c3p0 or other nurse and protocol droids makes sense to look more humanistic since they serve functions to facilitate human activitiy - but there is no way those functions are numerous enough to be priofitable.

I doubt it's actually achievable without either either a massive false positive rate or massive false negative rate.

Last I looked, the vast, vast majority of 3D printed firearms were basically just printing the receiver (the part that the government considers "the gun") which is more cosmetic than functional. It holds parts, but isn't pressure-bearing, the firing pin isn't attached to it, etc, etc. Like [1] is the part of a Glock that gets stamped, and you could trivially change every part of that except where the mag goes. You could move the mag button, you could add the slide for the upper afterwards (and would want to anyways, so it can be metal). You could also print snap-off plates over the holes so it looks solid.

I would wager humans would struggle with this given that the people designing the models are actively trying to hide what it is. This is a dedicated community, not really the casual "I'll do it if it's easy" crowd, because it's currently not super simple and easy.

1. https://shop.evosports.com/glock-g1718-lower-receiver-receiv...

The correct way is hard. You either have to manage firewalls on each host, or your switches need to have firewalls (I assume that’s a thing?). Hosts on the same subnet never hit layer 3 so IP-based firewalls don’t see them.

You either need very static infrastructure so you can hard-code firewalls on the hosts, or you need a system to dynamically manage the firewalls on each host, or an SDN that can sanely manage layer 2 flows. Little things like moving an app to a new server become a whole project unless you have really good tools to reconfigure the firewalls on everything that touches the app.

Then you need a way to let people self-service those rules or else security has to be involved in like everything just to do firewall rules.

It’s a good idea, but a huge pain and I’ve not seen good solutions

That's why I like mesh overlay networks (things like Tailscale, Nebula, etc.). You can largely set host firewalls to deny all, and access services over the overlay network which is software defined and more easily managed and deployed at scale.

It doesn't solve all problems, but its a good start, and modern MDMs & Group Policy (on the Windows side) make managing host firewalls easy enough.

It doesn't solve your self-service problem, though I'd argue self-service when it comes to host firewalls or otherwise shouldn't be a thing anyway.

Redis still has a niche. For something like a job queue, SQL is probably fine because adding a few ms of latency isn't a big deal. For something like rate-limiting where each layer of microservice/monolith component has their own rate-limit, that can really add up. It's not unheard of for a call to hit 10 downstreams, and a 10ms difference for each is 100ms in latency for the top of the waterfall.

Redis also scales horizontally much, much easier because of the lack of relational schemas. Keys can be owned by a node without any consensus within the cluster beyond which node owns the key. Distributed SQL needs consensus around things like "does the record this foreign key references exist?", which also has to take into account other updates occurring simultaneously.

It's why you see something like Redis caching DB queries pretty often. It's way, way easier to make your Redis cluster 100x as fast than it is to make your DB 100x as fast. I think it's also cheaper in terms of hardware, but I haven't done much beyond napkin math to validate that.

I suspect the old school stuff is generally less monitored. I think some of the cheap Baofeng radios support AES256 encryption. I think that's technically only legal with a business license from the FCC or some such, but I'd be a lot less worried about an FCC fine than having my phone tracked. There's probably some quick keypresses to clear the encryption config so it looks like it was on plaintext.

> Sudden and unexpected changes that increase uncertainty make it harder to invest in retraining, rather than easier.

This largely ignores the uncertainty and costs of a revolving workforce, and the value of having a workforce that all knows each other, the way the company works, and cares whether it succeeds.

When I was younger, I did a bunch of short-ish stints at various companies (I think average tenure was a hair under 2 years) because someone else would offer more money, more exciting work, etc. It was incredibly inefficient for the employer. "Waiting for my laptop/credentials to be issued" was like a full percentage point of my time there. I barely cared whether the company did well because I wasn't going to be there long enough for my RSUs to swing wildly either way. I never got to the point where I knew offhand who to talk to about niche parts of the product, and never became "that guy" for anyone else.

Frankly a lot of our stuff was higher risk and took longer because of the revolving doors. People important to a project would leave in the middle, or the person who wrote an important system would quit so we were left with whatever tribal knowledge we had.

Things worked well when the lady that wrote our invoicing system 20 years ago was still around but in security now. Things went poorly when she quit 6 months ago and now I have to reverse engineer it to figure out why I get stack overflows on invoices that contain an image.

> This largely ignores the uncertainty and costs of a revolving workforce, and the value of having a workforce that all knows each other, the way the company works, and cares whether it succeeds.

I'm not "ignoring" that, and a retrained workforce is also a revolving workforce.

When I run teams or companies I invest heavily in giving employees opportunities to train for new skills, level up on their existing skills, and grow into greater responsibility and knowledge domains. But that always needs to be balanced with the rest of the needs. When my runway is uncertain, that reduces the ability to plan for adding training for existing employees rather than bringing in a consultant or a new hire.

I'm not so sure, I've had a similar-ish issue on a W10 PC. I vaguely suspect a race condition on one of the drivers; I've specifically got my eye on the esp32 flashing drivers.

Sometimes it boots fine, sometimes the spinning dial disappears and it gets hung on the black screen, sometimes it hangs during the spinning dial and freezes, and very occasionally blue screens with a DPC watchdog violation. Oddly, it can happen during Safe Mode boots as well.

I would think hardware, but RAM has been replaced and all is well once it boots up. I can redline the CPU and GPU at the same time with no issues.