Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | felixyz's commentslogin

Your information diet. Social media. Gossipy and negative people. Mulling over old failures/regrets/slights etc. The mind is easily pulled along by negativity and outrage... as can be observed in our current global psychological state.


All those are fine, as long as you're able to process it in a healthy way after. I guess personally I focused more on bettering that processing, as sometimes you don't get to control what information you get served, so at least it works in all cases.


Idk, I find that carefully tending the garden of the mind , sowing the seeds I want to harvest later, eradicating the weeds with prejudice, and in general not entertaining things which are not useful to my purposes is, for me, a highly beneficial practice.

This does not mean to ignore things that are unpleasant, but rather to not allow things that do not benefit your diverse goals to occupy your productive potential, focusing instead on things that inform your path, actionable and relevant information, tools rather than distractions.


> in general not entertaining things which are not useful to my purposes is

Yeah, I think I do more or less the same as you describe, except my barrier to figuring out what is "not useful to my purposes" requires it to first exist in my mind for a while, before I can discard it as not applicable, as sometimes seemingly random things in one context somehow relates to completely different things.

I've chosen to do stuff sometimes that made no sense besides "It's fun but a waste of time" and it ended up leading me to realizations and experiences I wouldn't have had otherwise. But if I focused too much on avoiding things and optimizing "what I let in", I'd never be open enough to learn what I didn't know I could learn from it.


That is a danger, but at least for me, intense curiosity with a decent instinct for things that -might- be useful usually saves me from excessive tunnel vision.


Don’t be so optimistic about your ability to “process information healthily”. You are more of a slave to your instincts than you think and can’t always know whether you’re actually doing a good job at this— literally, it’s not possible to faithfully introspectively this.


The belief that you have control over your actions leads to better outcomes either way, no matter how true that is in reality. This has been found mostly with the idea of free will and internal locus of control.


> Don’t be so optimistic about your ability to “process information healthily”.

Don't be so pessimistic about your own ability to control how you process information, you can control this a lot more than you think, apparently.


I wonder who will fare better: the fools who don’t know their limits, or the ones who underestimate theirs?


Considering I'm pretty much as content I could be in life, and I know others who live their life pretty much opposite from what I do, and they're also content with their life, I think there is room for both types of people to be happy and fare OK :)


All glory is fleeting. Death is the great equalizer.


> as sometimes you don't get to control what information you get served

You actually do most of the times. It can be a conscious choice with surprisingly positive outcome. Choosing not to use social media, read news, disable push notifications and so on, go on information diet and this may not only make you a happier person but also increase your ability to filter useful information.


That's where the modern meaning of "digital circuit" etc comes from as well, the discrete/jointed nature of the digits (ie fingers). (Source: I read it a long time ago and was fascinated so stuck in my memory.)


I don't think it's directly connected. etymonline.com says it started with the meaning of fingers, then numerals derived from that meaning since numerals are counted on fingers, then the type of circuit derived from the meaning of numerals since they (at least conceptually) operate on numerals.


You have to be extremely careful when you set up a dev container, lock down file access, do not give the agent the power to start other containers or "docker compose up", restrict network access to an allow-list etc. Just running the agent in a container does little to protect you. (Maybe you know this, but a lot of people don't!)


Most of those things are what happens by default. Sure, be careful, but by default it's secure enough to prevent most potential issues. No need to lock down file access for example, by default it only has access to files inside the container, and of course by default containers don't have access to start other containers, and so on.

Good word of caution though, make sure you actually isolate when you set out to isolate something :)


I've just discovered and started using smolmachines^1 which actually have the requisite isolation.

1. https://smolmachines.com


As mentioned, "podman/docker run -it $my-image codex" also actually has the requisite isolation by default, no need for special software. Biggest risk is accidental deletion of stuff, easily solved without running an entire VM, which "smol" machines seems to be. No doubt VMs have their uses too, but for simple isolation like this I personally rather use already existing tooling.


Ok, YMMV, but a smolvm provides macOS-native, per-workload isolation -- vs trad container depending on a daemon and relying on namespaces (w/ a shared kernel). Easy "packing" into single-file executables, and a nice SDK, make it ~ideal for my needs; great balance of security:convenience.

https://smolmachines.com/#comparison


Cool ad bro, but stop claiming container won't get you "per workload isolation" just because they share kernels, in the context of this discussion it hardly matters, containers isolates enough for this.


ad? I have no affiliation w smolmachines, just glad I found it.


"didn't want to talk about it", absolutely. "dissolved metaphysics entirely", absolutely not.


Look, I read Continental philosophers too and I think they're cool, my point is that that kind of statement isn't what an analytic philosopher would say


Great news and a long time coming!


The tech world knows this. They are raking in money off of these scams. People with a rudimentary moral compass leave, those without stay, which makes it even less likely that industry will self-sanitize. The rest of society, out of survival instinct if nothing else, will have to force it to stop anti-social and fraudulent practices. Same as many other industries.


I've seen several Mac users have the same experience: going all-in on nix-darwin and then getting frustrated. But nix-darwin is one of the worst ways of getting into Nix, because its goal is to make your whole macOS system configurable with Nix, but macOS is a moving target and (unlike Linux) not built to be modular at all. I know people put a lot of hard work into nix-darwin, but it's simply not the main focus of Nix as a whole and sadly it might not ever become a seamless experience. (I'm not a mac user so not keeping up, but I do see colleagues trying it out from time to time.)

The solution here is: use Nix but don't use nix-darwin (at least not until you're generally comfortable with Nix for package management and dev shells). You do NOT have to use nix-darwin on Mac to reap 80% of the benefits of Nix (especially in a team setting).

After dropping nix-darwin, I think almost everyone will find that it's very easy to use Nix for sharing project setups with bespoke tooling. I just had a new team member onboard, knowing nothing about Nix, in a day or less, with several different languages and unusual tools.


> After dropping nix-darwin, I think almost everyone will find that it's very easy to use Nix for sharing project setups with bespoke tooling

Ahh, but I tried that too. I originally decided to play with nix-darwin because I was on a contract that used nix in their repos to ease onboarding of academic collaborators.

In practice, it was complicated enough that most of us ended up relying on the 2 nix experts to make any real changes, and when they left, the nix configs stagnated.

It might be the case that nix-darwin, and our particular python/ML repos, were "hard mode" for nix, but I truly think I gave it a fair shake.

If nix requires a lot of effort to do anything off the beaten path, it's just not the tool for me.


The way I do this is I task the agent with writing a script which in turn does the updates. I can inspect that script, and I can run it on a subset of files/folders, and I can git revert changes if something went wrong and ask the agent to fix the script or fine-tune it myself. And I don't burn through tokens :)

Also, another important factor (as in everything) is to do things in many small steps, instead of giving one big complicated prompt.


This is going to be very good for Gleam IMO. Having a super-easy on-ramp for using Gleam in Elixir projects will let people experiment with implementing eg more complex business logic in Gleam, and allow gradual adoption. Naturally, this is not the focus of the Gleam project itself, but for me, using Gleam for the core of a project while having access to the amazing Elixir ecosystem is a dream come true. I've been using mix_gleam but it's not perfect and since I started using Gleam pre 1.0, and it's a low-velocity project, updating became too complicated and I actually ended up moving everything to Elixir recently.


You're a hero!


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: