I use eInk as my daily driver and do everything including ssh into tmux into vim and code on eInk.
I build all my UIs with Rust and Ratatui. It works very well.
So for web, I think it would translate to:
0) NO ANIMATION. You have like, 0.3 fps. You might poke somebody’s eye out if you animate something.
1) NO SCROLLING. Pagination only.
2) Use actual added visual element to tell the user where their input control / cursor / selection is. Don’t rely on color, font weight etc. Put an asterisk, Unicode arrow or something.
3) Direct(?) action controls. A button should DO something. Don’t give me a button that opens a drop-down that opens a menu to do something.
4) Use the whole screen! Keeping a pixel on/off costs nothing. Only changes do. So any whitespace is just sacrificing screen real estate and forcing more frequent changes.
> Direct(?) action controls. A button should DO something. Don’t give me a button that opens a drop-down that opens a menu to do something.
That works until it doesn’t. Screen real estate is limited and touch accommodations are expensive. You have to be mindful of what you expose and what you hide. There’s no point in flooding the UI with buttons when people can barely make them out or even interact with them accurately—a mistouch is a lot more expensive than two correct touches.
Hybrids are the worst of both worlds when it comes to maintenance. They have their benefits and are key to fighting climate change, but mechanically you inherit all the problems from both sides.
There is no way you are driving a 25 year old car without serious maintenance like exchanging the timing belt. Add the frequent oil changes and all other yearly maintenance and it does add up.
Compared to a BEV, where you literally only need to change the break pads, and you may or may not need to change the battery, and the batteries keep outperforming the expected lifespan. BEV are simply mechanically much simpler devices.
> Hybrids are the worst of both worlds when it comes to maintenance.
While this seems intuitively true, I have some pushback, and I think that the reliability record of e.g older generations of Prius backs me up.
While you do have effectively two cars (an EV and an ICE) crammed into one, you’re not actually using both at full capacity all the time, which cuts down a lot on wear and tear. Your ICE is almost never run under load before it warms up, and is kept running at its most efficient rpm most of the time, your transmission is running under less load since it has help from the electric motors, and is often simpler (the aforementioned Prius does not have a reverse gear for example).
No it’s not nearly as simple as a BEV, but a well implemented hybrid system is absolutely an upgrade from a full ICE vehicle.
Personal experience backs up. Had a 2009 Prius, let it go because I did a terrible job handling rust buildup. Was still running great on the original battery pack with nearly 200k miles when we sold it.
Only significant problem was pothole related damage.
>you’re not actually using both at full capacity all the time, which cuts down a lot on wear and tear.
In theory this should be true. In reality hybrids eat motors compared to the same engine in an ICE. That's just what happens you have two ways of making the vehicle go to potentially mask "something's funny" type issues and your customer base is people who are buying an appliance based on an MPG number and some math.
With competent ownership (fleet vehicles provide a lot of examples, lots of hyrbrid Fords from the 00s and early examples still around) they come out about the same as an ICE car so you essentially get the hybrid system "for free" from a maintenance perspective. But that's not the median consumer.
By the time you get to variable valve lift and timing, the complexity of hybrids is either a wash or in favor of the hybrid when compared to a traditional engine. Electronics have been integrated in vehicles for generations now, and going hybrid lets you get rid of components and reduce overall mechanical complexity. It's not "two separate systems", it's just the obvious endpoint for internal combustion engines (and a process that is both a century old at this point, and already mature in other industries), because you get a strictly better machine from both a performance standpoint, and a design and engineering standpoint.
Not to mention, much of the complexity in ICEs comes back to cooling and lubrication, both of which are also concerns in BEVs.
This is what the person that I was responding to wrote, and it's objectively wrong:
>Hybrids are the worst of both worlds when it comes to maintenance. They have their benefits and are key to fighting climate change, but mechanically you inherit all the problems from both sides.
Also, much more complex is a value judgement. Complex in what way? High voltage electronics isn't exactly "not complex", and the coolant loops in BEVs are more complex than those in regular cars, because the tolerances are tighter.
I'm going to go out on a limb and assume that you mean mechanical complexity, but even then, that's not a given for ICEs. Gas turbines can have as little as one moving part, and there are piston engines that can get away with as few as four (the piston-conrod-crankshaft assembly and a compressor wheel).
At the end of the day, a good design has the minimum amount of complexity necessary to perform a given task, and no more. Given that BEVs are fundamentally unable to replace ICEVs in several niches (e.g. those relying on on-street parking, off-roading), maybe a little more complexity is warranted? As is, they aren't a 1:1 replacement for a standard car, and that's okay, but they're being marketed as such which is a recipe for failure.
I don’t think that a single-moving-piece gas turbine powered cars are currently on the market? And how many are single piston? Go carts and motorcycles maybe, but cars?
And I was using complex as a shorthand for „more things to maintain“.
A few companies have tried small APU range extenders, but there wasn't really a market for it at the time. The point was more that complexity is relative and not necessarily a given, and it's not necessarily a bad thing if it's required. A door is simpler than a bed, but I'd still rather sleep on a bed.
Maintenance is a function of usage. BEVs still have coolant and lubricants, which means they also have pumps. They have a HVAC system which also means filters and refrigerant. Yes, you don't have to replace spark plugs and a timing belt, but both of those are infrequent and generally easy. You might have to replace brake pads less, but hybrids share that same feature. Hell, hybrids don't even have fan belts, alternators, ignition motors, and transmissions these days. They share nearly all of their underlying foundation with BEVs, for most of the same reasons you would want to go BEV in the first place.
> mechanically you inherit all the problems from both sides
Not really. The transmission is an e-CVT in hybrids which has no torque converter, the main part that breaks first in an automatic transmission. Unlike a regular CVT, the e-CVT has no belt, either. The e-CVT basically never breaks, so you basically never have a transmission go bad in a hybrid. On top of that, because the traction battery is so small, it's replaceable for $1-2k instead of $10k+ for a BEV. If anything, hybrids are the best of both worlds. Had you specified plugin hybrids you would have been correct.
The joke is that you have to replace the traction battery twice in a Prius but you never have to replace the traction battery in a Tesla. But that's an indictment of the Tesla, not the Prius.
A Prius battery will last 150k km or so, but since the car can go 500k km +, that's a couple of battery replacements. A Tesla battery will last about 300k km, but that's longer than the rest of the car will typically last, so you never have to replace it.
False, hybrids reduce fuel consumption and therefore emissions substantially, Toyota Sienna went from 22 mpg combined to 35 mpg combined when they switched it from gas to hybrid. Several wild claims from you today.
I stand by my statement. We have passed the point where burning fossil fuels more efficiently helps. If you think that is wild, you should see the wild_fires_ going on.
Going to 100 mpg is still strictly worse than a battery powered by renewables.
The issue with ICEs is the fossil fuel part, not the engine part. Synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohols don't contribute to climate change at all. And alcohol fuels are both easy to make and about as good as hydrocarbons.
If we're talking synthetic fuels, you'd probably run cars on methanol rather than a hydrocarbon. Planes absolutely need kerosene, but cars can claw back most of the performance of petrol with alcohol fuels, and methanol is the simplest and cheapest to make. Certainly shipping seems to be going this way.
> Synthetic hydrocarbons and alcohols don't contribute to climate change at all.
If you are able to manufacture them in a completely emissionless way. That requires huge energy input though. Certainly has its uses, but too expensive for personal cars I'd think.
What I think would make sense is to use methanol as a seasonal energy store in temperate climates. Manufacture from PV in summer, burn in winter.
To be fair, DIY natural gas production from kitchen waste is a thing some people have done. It’s surprisingly doable and produces surprisingly large amount of usable energy.
Methanol is the obvious choice, because there are so many ways to make it. Shipping certainly looks to be moving in that direction, though ammonia is also being trialled. Ethanol via fermentation is also doable at scale, but most effective pathways rely on using arable land.
A modern Toyota hybrid doesn't have a transmission -- it's "eCVT" is basically a differential with a couple of embedded motors. It doesn't have a serpentine belt. It runs its engine in a highly efficient, highly reliable Atkinson cycle.
A modern Toyota hybrid is far more complex than an electric car, but the fact they are more reliable than a gasoline car is by design, not just good manufacturing.
Most people do not purchase new tires and mount them onto their old rims, themselves, at home. Most people do not know how to set the bead on an automotive tire. Replacing worn out tires with new ones is no less difficult maintenance than replacing brake pads.
I'm not talking about a seasonal tire change. I'm talking about when your tires have 45k miles on them and you need to buy different ones. Surely you don't just throw out your rims when you get new tires?
You are aware that the lifespan of a tire is significantly less than the lifespan of the car, right? Have you owned a car and driven it for more than 50k miles?
It seems me you think that what you linked is both common knowledge, and common to do one one's own. And maybe it is among your peer group! But we're talking about the.population at large here. It belongs in the same bucket as brake pad replacement.
Changing a timing belt is not serious maintenance. Just something that needs to be done at 100k. I just did the timing belt and water pump on my 300k tundra over the course of a weekend for 100 bucks.
As a data point: I’m at year 8 of Model X 100kWh with basically 0% capacity loss. If it exists at all, it’s less than 1-2%, so less than what I can reasonably measure with just the odometer and battery indicator.
Nissan Leaf gave BEV a bad name because it had much worse battery tech. Battery longevity is not a problem for modern, or even decade old cars.
Gemini (stolen technology they had nothing to do with) says:
Jeff and Sanjay led the development, but they collaborated with a small team of engineers to build and refine the database.
So, who were the engineers who actually built it? It lists "Fay Chang, Howard Gobioff, Mike Burrows, Wilson Hsieh, Deborah Wallach" but Idk if it's accurate.
I know that these talentless managers didn't do anything, that's for sure
Claude Sonnet 5 Medium more or less on the timestamp of the comment:
Prompt: Who won the 2026 World Cup?
Answer: Spain won the 2026 World Cup, beating Argentina 1-0 after extra time in the final at MetLife Stadium on July 19. Ferran Torres scored the only goal in the 106th minute, coming on as a substitute in the 62nd minute. It’s Spain’s second World Cup title, having also won in 2010.
Prompt: Nearby BBQ places open now?
Answer: (a geolocation permission request prompt for the browser followed by) Right in [redacted] both [redacted] (4.6 stars, open until [redacted]) and [redacted] ([redacted]) are close and currently open.
A bit further out but highly rated: [redacted]
Seems like LLM does a good job on those questions…
Almost certainly. That's OK, isn't it? Folks have been Googling things poorly for as long as there has been a Google to Google with, and now they have bots that do it on their behalf.
The only issue is that the eyeballs stayed with the LLM, which allows it to hold a position that is potentially very powerful. This is particularly problematic with people who believe that computers are infallible.
The point of this thread is that you cannot replace search engines with an LLM. If your example is an LLM using a search engine as a tool call, you have not replaced the search engine. It’s still there.
Yes. An external search engine is still there, for now.
But the user doesn't necessarily know anything about that, and they don't necessarily care.
If/when the time is reached when external search engines are no longer present in the LLM loop, it seems likely that regular folks won't even notice this shift. As long as the answer-making machine keeps making answers, they won't have any reason to pay attention to this kind of back-end minutiae at all.
The post content is great. I personally hate the way Cloudfare has been the „default answer“ for the bot problem because Cloudfare has become the most successful MITM attack in history. We need content like this to keep the internet alive.
The added explanations by the author in this comment thread are hilarious. You sir are a good writer.
Thankyou for the kind words. I am not for everyone which is the way I would like to keep it. I agree there need to be more alternatives to a big centralized MitM caching proxy even if they can be a bit rough around the edges like mine. There is always room for improvement if enough of us try to come up with alternatives and options.
The ban doesn't even target projects with one AI-assisted patch. What are you talking about? Or does Torvalds also plan on using Claude Code to rewrite Linux and Git in Rust?
If a project uses AI assistance, it’s pretty much guaranteed that eventually 50% of the code in the project will in one way or the other be touched by AI assistance.
And Torvalds does seem to plan on continue using AI assistance.
It‘s because there is basically no way for code to become „clean“ so the entire process is one way.
Unless you're willing to host vibe-coded projects, you're for sure opting out of society. It says so right on the second page of the social contract.
On the other hand, stealing all intellectual works ever created without compensating the authors, building a plagiarism machine and then selling access to the stolen knowledge? Now that's participating in society.
I don't know, should they? Unless I've missed something, Codeberg haven't mentioned anything like this. You seem to be the only one bringing this strange idea up. So why are you asking me?
You might have a point if Codeberg banned any and all AI-generated code, but they're not doing that. So why are you expecting them to follow your maximalist caricature of their principles?
This complaint follows the same logic as "You want companies to emit less CO2, yet you keep breathing". Sure, if you remove all nuance from a topic other people's decisions often make little sense - but that doesn't indicate a problem with their position.
I build all my UIs with Rust and Ratatui. It works very well.
So for web, I think it would translate to:
0) NO ANIMATION. You have like, 0.3 fps. You might poke somebody’s eye out if you animate something.
1) NO SCROLLING. Pagination only.
2) Use actual added visual element to tell the user where their input control / cursor / selection is. Don’t rely on color, font weight etc. Put an asterisk, Unicode arrow or something.
3) Direct(?) action controls. A button should DO something. Don’t give me a button that opens a drop-down that opens a menu to do something.
4) Use the whole screen! Keeping a pixel on/off costs nothing. Only changes do. So any whitespace is just sacrificing screen real estate and forcing more frequent changes.
reply