This is partly why I’ve escaped to text-only interfaces and monochrome icons wherever possible. Granted, it’s not ideal, but sticking with the icons offers no advantage.

(My first language is Russian.)

This is a promising road that I would probably not take. I have learned to live with simple per-line regular expressions. I have never felt that they slow me down.

In fact, the opposite is true: they let me craft fuzzy queries clearly, i.e., to balance the fuzziness across the query. I’ve never learned to do that with the black-box intelligent queries, which severely limited my scope in the past.

As a universal law, optimizing the fullscreen experience is a suboptimal goal. Generally, the best solutions are the ones that operate at the appropriate level, and if we optimize the fullscreen experience, then most solutions built for the right level are inaccessible to us.

The benefits of this approach, to my knowledge and estimation, include: no waiting for a slider to appear; no nested actions; no need to read the current value; each click does not depend on the current state; Fitts’ Law muscle memory boost (the buttons are effectively infinite-height targets); discoverability compared to scrollwheelable icons.

Lines are a fundamental building block of text and it’s not unreasonable to optimize them.

)

grep’s design is surprisingly winning, exceeding expectations to this day.

[1]: https://research.swtch.com/dogma

Asking a proof of PNC would imply proving non-contradiction by some means that assumes that contradictions do exist.

PNC doesn’t need a proof; it needs validation: a process of establishing an idea’s relationship to reality, whether through deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning, or sense perception.

> logic is [not] about what exists but rather a tool

If logic describes something that is not real, then our ideas and even institutions are detached from reality, and so some people claim a right to secede from “established truths” and place anyone who disagrees outside the circle of rational dialogue. That would be a harmless academic issue if the last two centuries weren’t a living record of that detachment playing out in politics, ideology, and culture.

Contexts don’t change much. They are merely implicit knowledge, subject to the same binary standard. They don’t change the truth, only applicability.

Mentioning Gödel here is not just cliche, it’s irrelevant. Gödel is about artificial formal deductive systems. They are not a claim to exclusive philosophy.

And why should the cross-market context be treated differently?

Bill Joy, the original author of vi, saw the vi commands as a problem, not a solution [1]:

    The fundamental problem with vi is that it doesn't have a mouse and therefore you've got all these commands. In some sense, its backwards from the kind of thing you'd get from a mouse-oriented thing.