I agree it's a game changer! For bash to do the same I put this in my .inputrc:

    ## arrow up
    "\e[A":history-search-backward
    ## arrow down
    "\e[B":history-search-forward

+1, i found out about this here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11211344 . total game changer.

It kind of seems obvious that people would rather share their content on the pre-established platforms.

I believe OpenAI didn't actually want to create an alternative platform. Instead, they wanted (and needed) to be in control. This is really due to the experimental nature of the technology and platform. They wanted to do market research yet retain the power to pull it at any time.

Arguably they were successful in that given that they now have the ability to stop it.

This made me immediately think of the Elm architecture.

To an extent this is how react works internally. There is a function which takes state and produces UI. In order not to have to re-render the whole UI if only a small part of the state changes, there is a diffing algorithm and "virtual dom" that is diffed against. Maybe it doesn't work exactly like that anymore but that's the gist of it.

What made it so popular was a combination of it being cross platform as well as turning into a "game/experience platform" instead of just a game.

But it is legitimately incredible what some people created in it. I remember playing a very good/accurate counter strike source clone in roblox. Felt exactly like playing a source engine game. I doubt that it was made by a kid.

Agreed and it's an important distinction to bring up. There are some pretty cool projects that use react like that, e.g., vicinae [0]. And one can implement a different renderer for react, here is a tui renderer [1].

0: https://www.vicinae.com/ 1: https://github.com/vadimdemedes/ink

Sure, they have no obligation but the way you describe Newpipe to paint it as "obstructive" feels off to me.

When you offer a free service, by definition of it being free, you can't hold consumers of that service accountable for not furthering your revenue. They are impeding revenue only if it's not actually free (or only under false pretenses) which dismantles your first sentence here.

So they are sharding by time/day?

I have a similar project right now where I am scraping a dataset that is only ever offering the current state. I am trying to preserve the history of this dataset and was thinking of using the same strategy. If anyone has experience or pointers in how to best add time as a dimension to an existing generic dataset, I'd love to read about it.

At this point do you believe porting the codebase to Zig was the right decision? Do you have any regrets?

Also, I'm excited about trying out your language even moreso than Zig. :)

This is a great endeavour. Recently I have been thinking about how to add syntax and metaprogramming extensions to programming languages without forking the compiler/interpreter. Source maps are needed there in order to have good editor support through e.g. an LSP server proxy. In researching it I was a bit let down I couldn't find too much research and specifications for the topic.

It looks really cool but the thing is, having learned git just as a cli tool, I don't think any UI would convert me from that workflow.

The exception is maybe diffing, where I just use meld as the difftool.

I think you're missing out on magit.

With magit, the routine git tasks are very fast & flowing, git becomes highly discoverable, and complex tasks are made easy.

For example of things that are tedious on the CLI: magit makes it easy to make "--fixup" commits (since you can select the commit you intend to fix up). Or if you want to use something like git-absorb, that's also easy in magit.

Or magit makes it easy to stage/unstage line by line.