HN is degrading quickly thanks to comments like this. I've used vim for a long time, have worked in high-level engineering positions (lead, principal, similar roles) for decades with huge companies you've no doubt heard of as well as the US government. I've published articles and software going back to the 90s. Based on the content of your comment I think it's likely I was programming in vi(m) before you were born.
I have never read the manual for vim, nor for most software that I use. I'm a "learn by doing" type - optimal methods of learning vary and is subjective. There are plenty of people who because of ADHD or another reason simply don't learn best from manuals.
The Vim manual (:help) is not particularly well organized for discoverability.
It's not all in a single file: it's chopped up into files like usr_01.txt, usr_02.txt. That limits the scope of searching.
A web search for "Vim manual all in one page" turns up nothing. (Contrast with GNU programs which have HTML manuals that are both in separate nodes linked together, or all in one HTML page.)
Completion is not at all mentioned in the topic headings at the top of :help; literally, the word does not appear anywhere in that table of contents. That's in spite of there being a section of the TOC headed "REFERENCE MANUAL: These files explain every detail of Vim.".
None of the linked files have a description blurb mentioning completion.
Or sessions, for that matter. I used Vim for about 25 years before starting to make use of sessions.
What is in the manual is not all useful; if you were to read that whole thing, you'd be wading through furlongs of "meh" to find an inch of "wow, useful". And at the end, you would still be installing extensions.
E.g. the built-in switching among buffers is pretty poor; Vim benefits from an extension for that.
You can't always imagine what a feature is like to use from the way it's described. (Push these buttons to get this effect.) You sometimes have to experiment with it to get it.
> Picking up bits here and bits there, is not learning. It is just being lazy and clumsy.
This is at best a lack of understanding of how attention disorders work, at worst a lack of empathy.
Some people are only able to commit things to memory after putting it into practice many times over. Engineering roles nowadays often require you to be intimately familiar with a few languages, frameworks, CI pipelines, databases, cloud offerings, many protocols, and more. This job has grown well beyond the days when your sole responsibility was a small set of modules and a narrow cross section of technology.
The bandwidth for reading a manual just to lose the ability to recall it a week after changing context is just not there for a lot of people, and to be indignant about the learning mechanisms others use to get around these obstacles just seems silly. Yeah I probably would have googled “vim autocomplete” after some time, but modern tech sensory overload would likely have me googling something else.
> This is at best a lack of understanding of how attention disorders work, at worst a lack of empathy.
You can even call it total lack of care. There are literally dozens of readily available treatments for your condition so excuse me for not shedding a tear. My glasses help me see better so I can't play the myopia card. Your medication helps you function better so spare us the ADHD card.
> Some people are only able to commit things to memory after putting it into practice many times over.
_Everyone_ needs that at varying levels, not just people wearing the four-letter badge. And Reading The Fucking Manual—specifically Vim's which is by far the best I've seen—doesn't replace that _at all_. It's literally _never_ one or the other. You learn the stuff from first principles _and then_ you apply it. Learning in the abstract, without applying, is useless and "doing" without proper foundations is useless too. The only difference is that only the former is fruitless, which convinces those who do the latter that it's somewhat OK.
> The bandwidth for reading a manual just to lose the ability to recall it a week after changing context is just not there for a lot of people
What's also there is their medication.
> and to be indignant about the learning mechanisms others use to get around these obstacles just seems silly.
What's silly is refusing to take one's meds. Or celebrating failure.
> Yeah I probably would have googled “vim autocomplete” after some time, but modern tech sensory overload would likely have me googling something else.
Googling "vim autocomplete" would just have been another cop-out and another failure anyway.
I wasn’t really looking for pity, just sharing the perspective of a person who has dealt with moderately severe ADHD. I’m doing just fine now and am enjoying my work again. Medication was a critical part of that journey, but attention disorders don’t really work like myopia. You normally don’t walk into a psychiatrist’s office, get fitted for a dosage, and then walk out recovered. It’s one piece of a greater treatment strategy that can be complex and wildly different from patient to patient. In one sense though it is like myopia because at some level of severity there is no total correction, and you have to narrow the scope of your life in order to get things, often at the expense of other responsibilities. I think we can both agree that you have to play the cards you’re dealt, but I would just encourage you—at the very least—to not bring others down if the way they play them doesn’t make sense to you. It may be working for them in the long run.
Hahaha! This is so funny, thank you for sharing your world view!
A position you advance is that there is value in reading the manual, and organized, discipline, self-reliant learning, that emphasizes structure progress toward mastery. Paired with that is the notion of taking pride in mastery of one's tools, equating the "technical arts" to a sort of "craftsmanship". These are undoubtedly a positive takes, and undeniably a useful learning strategy, and a commendable goal. Pursued with vigor, and if it's a fit for a given individual, such a strategy or approach, will likely to serve anyone well, in any endeavor, who practices it.
However, it's important to remember that there are many ways that you can accomplish your goals of learning and mastery, and that the exact methods and practices could be very different for different people. Just like the aphorisms "there's not one path to success" or "success is rarely a straight line", even the path of learning is well-known to follow an ascending series of peaks and troughs: the so-called, "Learning Curve". In short, while it's certainly good to read the manual, as you say, it's also not the only path to learning, and it's beneficial to appreciate that.
Yet that's not the only stance of interest in your comments in this thread. And it may be pertinent to discuss this "other aspect" of your comments, that while it may be somewhat "outside your wheelhouse" nevertheless will serve you equally well, if not substantially better, than your chosen learning method, in your endeavors and interactions in future. This other aspect makes regard to how you communicate.
So, if we take a look at your comments in this thread, it seems what you're saying is: there is one way of doing things regarding learning, it's the way you do things, and it's the right way, and any other way to do things, is lazy, clumsy, and likely the result of someone being disabled and not taking their medication? So, in essence, you're right, and if people question that or don't follow your way, they are failing and probably need medication?
In simple terms it looks as if you're being overly negative. In more detail, while it initially seemed you were simply temporarily grumpy, and trying to take it out on others, analysis and reflection of the totality of your work on this thread indicate you've developed your perspective over a long time. This perspective is basically the superiority of your way and your belief in your role as the rightful judge of others, who differ from you, and are inferior (failure, lazy, clumsy, disabled), is that right?
As you said above: good for your own confidence I guess, but bad for your employer/family/society, etc. It is not an approach which cultivates psychological safety for others. The strident and angry tone of your initial comment, combined with the expletive language you use is easy to interpret as rude, and abusive. The use of pejorative descriptions of those who differ from you is likely to be seen as superior, abusive, and bigoted.
While on the surface your view seems funny (I'm sorry to say, in a laughing at sense), it also feels kind of sad.
I still think some personal unhappiness must be driving your choice to go down this path, but that particular form it takes seems to be more a strong suit reaction you have developed over time in order to cope with such hardships.
You are clearly intelligent, and likely reasonably well to do, but the emphasis you place on your superiority could be read as a compensation tactic to make up for ways in which your achievements did not rise to your ambitions.
So I'm guessing you feel underappreciated in your work or life. This sense of being misunderstood, and underappreciation could then manifest in this way of acting where you are willing to risk people's dislike of you in order to act abusive and superior, because your experience has led you to believe, people won't appreciate you as you deserve anyway, even if you're nice.
So, in a sense, a nothing to lose attitude, which interestingly contrasts with the mask of superiority you wear. To put it another way, you trade social capital for the ego hit of superiority, because why value the opinions of others if you or your way is better than them, anyway? It's a neat, circular, self-contained and self-fulfilling delusion: a robust defensive tactic. One paradox arises in that, by pretending you are superior, you limit your ability to learn, undercutting the very justification for your pretense of superiority, in the first place, and your goals of mastery and being "right".
One way to think about it is that this kind of 'asshole nerd' trope is often unfortunately tolerated because of the nerd aspect: think of pre-reformation Linus, for example. But this kind of enabling nerd environment for your abuse is unhealthy, and may have contributed to denying yourself the treatment you could get to help you improve. It's an interesting contrast with the way you seek to paint others as needing treatment for a mental issue, as this could be read as a shield to conceal the fact of your suffering from one yourself, or as a way to deny to yourself that you're the problem, or disclaim responsibility for improving, or getting treatment.
Basically in your behavior we see a constellation of robust defensive tactics, likely crafted by an intelligent mind, to protect someone clearly deeply in pain. The defenses enable you to be productive, but at what cost? Especially to those around you. You in effect trade their psychological safety which you attempt to erode with your abuse, for your own, which you attempt to shore up with your pretense of superiority. It is, then, a very and essentially, selfish tactic. It's understandable, because you're in pain, but that we can understand it and empathize with you, doesn't mean your behavior is good, nor should be tolerated.
The defenses keep you injected with the addictive mainline of a superiority ego hit or reward endorphins resulting from that, but that only deepens the problem, and shields you from being in touch with and processing the pain, that could be your path to heal, if you're brave enough to face it.
But I totally understand if you don't, because...facing the pain can be incredibly scary. But if you don't, then, what's the alternative? Either you surrender your defenses as a result of social censure when you are not healed, leading you to suffer more...or you keep your defenses, but don't progress...leading you to continue incorrectly and unjustifiably trying to take out your emotions on others? This may cause suffering for those you encounter, and limits your experience of joy by pushing people away. You're smart, so you've likely already noticed this pattern in your own life. But, being smart is not enough, you have to know how to navigate it, and it's not obvious. Plus, you have to have the courage to face the things...and the adoption of defenses like yours indicates an avoidance, which is completely understandable, because who wants to face pain?
So, I don't think meanness is the right approach to deal with this kind of attitude, because clearly it results from suffering. Of course, sometimes boundaries must be set, counter-punches must be made. But, paradoxically, a general approach of meanness will only reinforce your delusion that you are under-appreciated and need to respond with hostility: meanness is only training for strengthening the defensive tactic your attitude clearly is.
Just like former 'jerk nerd' Linus eventually listened to feedback, and sought help, and now apparently is doing better, it's possible for people to change their behavior. If in your reflections you think this may apply to you and be useful for you, I encourage you to take the brave step of owning that and seeking help. But Linus is probably not the best example, there are many people who have become better people. And the pattern you display, is not unique to you. It is very common, and I believe it's very solvable. If you're willing to do the work. But...thing is man, there's no "manual" -- haha.
Also, enhance your calm, man! There's plenty of ways to do things: it can work for you, but doesn't mean it's the only way. And even you are "right" in your way, doesn't mean it's the only "right" way, and doesn't mean everyone else is "wrong". If you're not open to ways outside of yours as having value, you're unlikely to really learn to master what you seek to master. If you're already "right", and anything else is wrong, you're unlikely to learn and improve, undermining the very goal you say you have. Have a good one, man! And get help for this stuff, I believe you can do better! :)
Right? It was crazy. That monsieur should enhance his calm. Oh well, anyone can be dealing with something other people don't understand, I guess. Thanks for sticking up for me! :)
The site advertises the ability to track individual handheld VHF/UHF radios, which are within an order of magnitude of the transmit power of cellular handsets. Even if they don't have the power to do that right now, they certainly could in the next generation of satellites.
Or they might already have the power right now and just not be advertising it. Or maybe the hardware is there but the software is still being refined. (This strikes me as the most likely, since the digital transmission from a cellphone is significantly different from analog voice, it would take some different processing layers to handle it.)
With the current constellation, they advertise 24 passes per day, but as they continue to add satellites, it approaches continuous. Furthermore, if the capability is commercially valuable, it's possible that other megaconstellations could just add the functionality to their own next-gen birds and then it's completely game-over.
The limiting factor, as I understand it, would be downlink bandwidth. And there are a number of mitigations (on-orbit processing and compression, etc) for that.
If you think the CIA is one of the most evil and dangerous organizations on earth, you probably haven't had a lot of exposure to organizations around the world. I'm not saying their mission and means of achieving it is necessarily angelic. I'm saying that there are hundreds or thousands of much more evil organizations in this world.
Belarusian KGB, Chinese Ministry of State Security and United Front Work Department and 610 Office, Cuban Intelligence Directorate, Iranian Ministry of Intelligence, Haitian Service d'Intelligence National (funded by the CIA), Israeli Mossad, Pakistani ISI, Myanma OCMSA, North Korean Ministry of State Security and RGB.
I'd like to post my perception since I was a 90s hacker.
Inclusivity is arbitrary here - no one in the scenes that I was familiar with were excluded because of race or sex - it's just that certain demographics weren't attracted to that 'scene'. Those like me, ADHD, awkward, and not extremely socially capable at the time, were however sometimes excluded. There were still the cool nerds and the lame nerds. I was pretty involved in the scene, being a staff writer of 2600 (several articles published under various handles, my name listed in the cover for a couple of years), and spending some time talking to "famous" people.
Later I grew up, spent 4 years in the military, then used money I earned to finally go to college, graduating eventually with an engineering Master's in my 30s. As I grew up I realized that the whole 90s / early 2000s hacker scene was mostly just a social clique. I learned that many people who were revered had marginal skills. I learned that the paranoia and self-aggrandizement ("The FBI totally monitors #2600 to learn our skills") was really just immaturity. The whole thing eventually seemed lame as I grew into an adult. I realized 2600 was really just a money machine and a manipulative scheme. Phrack went downhill quick, sadly (I also published there).
Still, this was a classic and wonderful time. Even I made friends - some that I talk to now, 20+ years later. I learned a lot. I got started on a tech path that took me very far and into regions of tech I'd never learn about otherwise like radio and telephone. I'm still a hacker, but legally. I don't miss the "scene" at all, but I do wish I was more included in it at the time. As this article illustrates it must have been great.
I generally agree, but some of those claims were true. It wasn't entirely immaturity. I was part of the group at the 2600 meeting near the Pentagon that got raided by Secret Service dressed up like mall security. They conducted some busts a few weeks later based on things illegally confiscated from that raid.
The FBI did monitor #2600 irc.. it wasn't to learn our skills. But they most definitely ran a bot logging it - they showed me irc logs, asked questions about specific other people I was hanging out with in the SF scene at the time and warned my dad I was in with the bad hacker crowd. This was after a Red hat 6.2 box I built was owned by some php vuln and the person I did it was taking credit cards via email on that same box. He basically pointed at me and said I must be in some l33t hax0r gang stealing his customer credit cards info.
It sounds to me like part of your growing up was realizing that the people you looked up to were human, and it shattered some illusions you had.
In truth, pretty much every social "scene" has a small core of dedicated people surrounded by a much larger social clique. This becomes more and more true as it grows in size. There will always be the "talkers" who are good at communicating but have "marginal skills," but I'd argue everyone has different strengths. For example, there are some absolutely excellent hackers who are terrible writers, and other people who write quite well about hacking, but cannot hack themselves. We need both types.
While quite a lot of the worry about government monitoring might actually be paranoia, I'll simply note that Snowden's relevations showed that a lot of the fears were justified. Perhaps there are tradeoffs in privacy that you are willing to make, which others refuse to make.
I was on the periphery of the 90s "scene" and this rings true to me. One year at DefCon I ended up (somehow) tagging along w/ (some of?) the Cult of the Dead Cow crew and friends to a dinner. I had a decidedly "Wow, I'm sitting at the cool kids table..." kind of feeling.
Age and location had a lot to do with it, too. I was in rural Ohio versus in Boston, Chicago, NYC, etc. I also did community college versus moving away. There were fewer opportunities for face-to-face hacker interactions when you might be the only person in your county into that kind of stuff.
I still lean on my telephony knowledge from back then. It's amazing how much of it is still relevant even in the world of VoIP.
dildog joined the same company I worked at for a short time and I met some of the cDc folks through that. It was a good continuation of my life education on “no matter how good you thought you were [with computers], someone is better.”
> many people who were revered had marginal skills.
Yeah, socially organizing and motivating people doesn't rank very high on technical achievement, but it's often the difference between groups you've heard of and groups you haven't.
And guess who inspires more young people to go learn?
Beware of Vultr. The product works fine but the customer service is horrible. I had three days of downtime and they got sick of me asking for updates, ignored me, and didn't tell me when the service came back up. I switched back to DO and I'm fine with that again.
As I said above I had a bad customer service experience with them. I've used a lot of hosting providers and Vultr was the most ghetto-feeling by far. Back to Digital Ocean for me, or if they stop hosting custom images, I'll try and find another
I used Johnscompanies, Linode, DigitalOcean, then Vultr. Vultr shocked me by how poor their customer service was, after 3 days of downtime, multiple claims of fixing the issue soon, and not bothering to notify me when it finally was fixed. I didn't experience that at any of my previous hosts.
Yeah the CS isn't excellent but it is mostly for self-supported workloads.
Like OVH - if you need support for anything beyond provisioning/troubleshooting things outside of the VM, it's not the best choice.
If you compare it with ec2 support costs + vm costs... it's difficult to have it all.
Digital Ocean does a good job of support too, but I'd rather not need support (with most tooling self-serve) than have support but have issues. I've had VMs at vultr running for 3+ years with very few issues (one host migration which they did "live" for me and notified me a few days in advance). I've had more issues with degraded instances in ec2 that require a ticket sent to ec2 support and 3-days wait for them to assign it to a new host.
> Vultr shocked me by how poor their customer service was
I'll counter that. I found that their customer service was acceptable as far as I could tell. I ran an OpenBSD bare metal server on them for quite a while.
Were they great? No. But I have also found that the big guys aren't that great either. Sure, the big buys hit a lot more problems so it's likely your issue is resolved because somebody big paying lots of money also just had that problem.
However, if your problem is semi-unique and some large customer isn't also having it, you are completely SOL with the big providers. They will never fix your issue.
I'm curious what keeps you invested in BSD. I'm not a hater or anything, and in fact I have some experience, my last Sysadmin job involved a network with almost exclusively FreeBSD servers and I had to do some fast learning on their spin.
It was objectively great, but eventually I migrated everything to Linux in order to make things more accessible to the people coming over from Windows servers, and I didn't find that things got any less stable or reliable. Of course, it might be that I'm the common factor there, for good or ill :>
For me, why I have all my servers in colocation running FreeBSD. Is for the reason that it's not Linux.
Even though I am Linux Engineer by job title, I've lost the sticky from the adhestive that Linux used to give me. It feels now more of a pressured big-corp grab then an OS that made game-changing moves. It's made it's comfort zone.
I am cynical and that when one thing gets popular I tend to shift. So when FreeBSD becomes the next glory, I'll probably jump to Solaris or something; that and bHyve.
That hypervisor has never let me down. With ZFS Snapshots and bHyve writing directy zvols, is just too tasty to turn down.
I ended up going back to Digital Ocean and using a custom FreeBSD cloud image I installed cloud-init on. My experience at vultr was that bad, and DO has always been good to me
I have never read the manual for vim, nor for most software that I use. I'm a "learn by doing" type - optimal methods of learning vary and is subjective. There are plenty of people who because of ADHD or another reason simply don't learn best from manuals.
The vitriol belongs on reddit.