@a7@icedquinn If it's filesystem-based, that'd be cool. rio is fine as a window manager, but it's just fine: the main thing it gives you is that it fits perfectly with what :bwk: called "the tools approach" and fits really well with the rest of the OS. Like, you can grep a shell window running in another session. You can mount a remote display and then start sending it events and moving windows around.
Like, on Linux, X11 fits how things work. I don't like how things work, but it fits.
I typed "arcan" into the search engine and then "arcan window manager" because a bunch of irrelevant stuff popped up and this link was purple: https://arcan-fe.com/about/ . I must have looked at it at some point. It does look like if I were to replace X with something, this would be the thing. But X is X, Linux is Linux.
@a7@p he was pretty big on emacs-esque controls where you hold modifier keys down (because of the obvious physical state of holding keys down) but wanted more modifier keys because they would do shit. he was put in charge of making one computer for compaq once, which ended up being like a machine that permanently ran wordpad and had no filesystem because the whole thing relied on your grepping around to find shit.
@a7@p he's partly right, it turns out. later studies after his death looked in to outlook mail users. it turns out the filer vs piler thing only favors filers when search engines suck. the pilers win out in the end because filing things in to a tree is just a shitty degraded form of a search index.
@a7@p i still want a clone of The Brain because it did some neat stuff like that. was a pile of notes (like /z/) but you could kind of tag notes together in this visual graph. the idea is that you were supposed to, say, drop a bookmark in The Brain for each page you came across while doing a reading.
then you would tag them spatially (it did the four cardinal directions, idk why)
when you go to find something later it shows you the graph for each note. so you can do something like each link is "down" and then if that page goes on a tangent you can go "left," so finding old notes again involves searching for close enough and walking your original line of research until you find it again.
super cool. not 200$ a year subscription vig cool.
@icedquinn@a7 The cool thing about io10.dev is that you can get, by means of some static content (static from the server's point of view: you can just clone the repo and serve it as static assets), a browser on a standard fluoridated environment to give you a pretty reasonable environment to do normal computing.
I should get back to work but did get fascinated by pipeworld for a minute. It looks like it's full of stuff that I wanted, although it also is full of some stuff that I didn't:
> pipe(“find /usr”, “grep –line-buffered share”)
(Setting aside that he's using some kind of :fluoride: markdown processor :fluoride: that turns U+0022 into U+201c.)
I experimented with this kind of thing a long time back. It's just not going to match the shell. The bare words and the convenience are features for interactive hacking, not bugs. The shell's syntax is specialized for creating this kind of pipeline to fit things together, so it's a moderate bummer that pipeworld, a thing for interactive hacking, picked "not pipes". The rest of it, the data encoding and all of it, that's amazing (or at least the demo is).
If we're lucky, the YOLD people all flock to Wayland and then they wander off with the rest of the people that want a DE and to use Linux the same way people use Windows. Linux might have a chance at being good again after that.
@p@verita84_uwu@mischievoustomato i'm coming to the realization wayland will never be good until i fix it and i kind of want to do other things with my life :comfyglare:
> filing things in to a tree is just a shitty degraded form of a search index.
No, no, this is like saying that you don't need to name something as long as you can point at it.
Having used both a Terrible iThing and a real computer, I can say that a real computer is nicer for most tasks that I want to use a computer for. The concept of a place is not mutually exclusive with the concept of a search index. Search indexes are fine if you remember what you want. Sometimes I don't even know what I want, but I know where it is: you can't replace "walking around the neighborhood" with "type the thing you hope to find into Yelp". With named things in a place, I can communicate this with other people. (I think coders that do a tour of duty in tech support end up cured of some of their notions about UIs. You can communicate a shell one-liner much easier than you can communicate )
I also can't search the entire internet: just searching the web is a big enough pain in the ass half the time. It's simple enough to index your own stuff, but indexing the system's stuff adds in a lot of cases context that you don't want and in a lot of other cases, misses things you want. Indexing the web is a large task. Indexing the entire net is another thing entirely, no one's even attempted it. You get these massive efforts like Shodan and all they do is index the type of thing that sends whatever the data is, it doesn't even have the data.
> outlook mail users.
I think this is the problem. That kind of study gives you data that is over-fit for the task, you can't really extrapolate. I don't need to communicate a specific thing by name to anyone if I'm looking for something in my inbox or I want to send someone something. Paths, and more generally URLs, are pass-by-reference; email is pass-by-value.
@p@a7 > No, no, this is like saying that you don't need to name something as long as you can point at it.
this is somewhat accurate.
> iThing
i think its more that all things exist amorphously in the data store (ex. venti) and then you impose order upon it with outlines. the lost art of having outlines with cloning support.
> 15 attachments
my blob in crepes zip exists for a reason :neocat_googly_shocked: