I don't understand how devs don't use a tool that makes multiple versions of everything possible.

If you want their fancy windowing stuff, I think you also need to use their apps. Terminal, IDE, etc etc. Switching to a different terminal is friction, switching to a different IDE is a really big jump. My bet is most people aren't going to switch to a different IDE just to get different window management behaviours. And if the bundled IDE is brilliant, then you can't use that without this window management coming along for the ride too.

The differentiator for this project is the window management. Don't restrict that to just the re-implemented apps within the walled garden, and then you have the behaviour implemented in the right place.

The homepage explicitly calls out that "Cate is not a window manager replacement" yet as far as I can tell pretty much all its features are window management. And the ones that aren't would be better off living in their own dedicated apps anyway (or aren't going to replace people's preferred editors or terminals).

The infinite canvas idea sounds cool, and I'm not aware of a window manager that lets you zoom and pan around a massive "desktop", but it really does sound like the cool bits would be better implemented as an actual window manager. Then we can keep using our favourite IDEs, terminals, editors, etc. etc which is where the actual friction for change sits, and have the cool infinite canvas/docking/arranging stuff on top.

https://youtu.be/Eq3bUFgEcb4?si=lcjA8fF4e3dINvmX

The only useful head's up I can give is the current position marker on your playback is quite a long way behind the audio, around 1-2 beats on the one piece I tried.

I scratched my itch with a custom UserScript

https://github.com/mgladdish/website-customisations/tree/mai...

I'm particularly pleased with how quotes are rendered - I wouldn't go back to 'default' HN now.

BDD in whatever implemenation is a gigantic waste of everyone's time.

Starting by choosing which muscle to work is a really odd choice. If you're novice enough that you don't know which movements to choose then you're also likely to not know which are the most effective muscles to target for your goals.

Then the app gives you a bunch of exercises to target that one muscle, but doesn't tell you which other muscles the exercise also targets. Or any clues on suitable weights or rep ranges, never mind progression. It also seems it's suggesting doing all the suggested movements. I picked barbell and pecs and it gave me three exercises. Then, even more weirdly, I came in again to write this comment and selecting the same options it gave me a different set of three exercises. First time around it didn't even suggest barbell bench press - the most obvious and common exercises for that muscle and equipment. That's all really confusing and un-obvious.

Being able to pick a template programme and tweak from there seems a much friendlier way of getting started.

Maybe making use of these could solve the exercise selection and programming issues in the app?

https://signal.org/blog/phone-number-privacy-usernames/

As per the article, the usability tradeoffs are considerable. But the separation of domains into separate VMs is really lovely. If nothing else, having a separate VM per client just feels "right". No intermingling of code and, even more importantly, secrets or credentials or even comms. Being able to use the same physical machine for personal stuff as well as work is also a bonus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wyAWi1dh8Fs

I put up a dumb password prompt at the start of the journey (with the password given on the page) and haven't been flagged again since :fingerscrossed:

Although GDS lost their teeth (and their technical way) some years ago, this rule is still a major win for end users. To be honest, I'm sick of seeing techies fob this one off just because they want to use [insert fashionable framework of the day].

Disclaimer: I have a dog in this fight as I run a forms SaaS aimed at central gov and have also re-implemented the GOV.UK design system. But I've done it the way it was intended and only used JS for progressive enhancement.

There's no "about" page or anything I can find that describes what this website is or does. The domain suggests it's AI-generated summaries of papers, maybe? If so, it would be great to understand how it works and why. How are papers selected for inclusion? How are summaries checked for accuracy?

If you can nail accessible PDFs then you'd open up a very big government market.

I'd only add that the sort of music they're aiming at is already pretty much at your end state. Muzak (and its slightly more advanced cousin Library Music) isn't about human expression, but about a background noise to convey a loose mood. God forbid we should just listen to what someone has to say - it always needs a distracting background interference to go with it.

But, like it or not, creating this drivel does put the food in the mouths of a great number of professional musicians. Even big-name recording studios aren't busy full time with wonderful new creative experiments, it's jingles and library music that keep their doors open. But even this work has been declining sharply for decades, and this new wave of tools will just continue that decline.

If anything, it's going to entrench the music profession for the privileged as there'll be an even smaller pot of work available and so only those that can afford the massive time investment and comfortable with the risk of being without work will survive.

And all this because the people building and paying for these tools are themselves musically illiterate - they don't know what makes good music, or why muzak is utterly devoid of the thing they profess to love and democratise.

Fascinating to see how clunky apple.com looks even relatively recently.