Thanks! Interesting to read the rationale behind it [0] which in short is, try not to use what is basically a terminal emulator within a terminal emulator, and window management should be done by the terminal emulator.
I primarily use tmux for session persistence (in ssh sessions) anyhow, and still default to my muscle memory for new tabs/windows in the window manager.
I haven't tried it yet. The proof of the pudding will be in eating it I suppose.
In a similar vain, I currently enjoy reading A Philosophy of Walking by Frederic Gros. Gros draws the musing of various philosophers on walking. To me, his description of the slow beat of the footstep that propels imagination resonates with how walking works for me. When I'm stuck on something and feel I need to keep pushing towards a solution, a short break, often the result of an obligatory walk/ride to the train station, already sets my mind in motion.
Crucial is that the walk is not an intentional break for the purpose of brainstorming, because then my thoughts stay stuck. Such walking is 'idle' in the sense that it is an almost automatic process. The whole point is that walking/idling should not be a productivity tool.
It seems those were drawn by Barbara Remington [1] who didn't have time to read the books before making her illustrations. Apparently, the Lord of the Rings was in public domain in the US for a short while, so the publisher (and Tolkien) had to rush for a new 'authorized' version.
That is on the main branch. Behind the scenes [1] they're working a a huge rewrite to use the Bevy engine. A big effort that seems to be moving at a quite constant pace. It seems they're doing it quite rigourously: I've seen some issues in the bevy tracker where they check what is specific to their project, or where bevy can use some work.
As Fairphone owner I have become somewhat sceptical of their repairability claim.
Mine fell on its side on some pebble stones. The power-button, unprotected by the case, got scratched. The button doubles as a fingerprint reader, which ceased working due to the scratch. At first, I thought "no worries, this phone is friendly to those who want to repair it."
It turns out, this part is not available for replacement. I think this is an oversight; just like the screen, it is an outward facing part, hence, bound to be damaged for some.
Then, I brought it to my local repair shop. The owner had to tell me that they cannot repair Fairphone's, and that, for him, it is one of the worst companies to deal with. They try to centralise all repairs in their own repair center. Which means sending the phone -- which I need -- away for 2 weeks; paying a fee for diagnosis, an unknown cost for repair, and the hassle of a flashed phone. I already know what's broken, I just want the part.
I feel this is a real shame, as I am fully supportive of the stated aims of the company, and I want the product to be good.
[Aside: suggestions on how to deal with a scratched fingerprint reader are most welcome. E.g. can the scatch be re-painted? The phone thinks the reader is there, but it doesn't register any touch. ]
> Then, I brought it to my local repair shop. The owner had to tell me that they cannot repair Fairphone's
I brought mine to my local repair shop as well and they were completely unwilling to even try to repair it. Then I went home and tried myself and managed by just bending back some pins. The display cable had gotten loose. Have worked fine since then.
But is that because the phone is difficult to repair or because repair shop personnel has clear instructions to not try anything on devices they haven't been trained on? Likely "trained" as in their parts supplier does not have a QR code to the YouTube instruction in the ring binder.
Chances are they refused because it's not only a niche phone but a niche phone that's particularly repairable without shop logistics.
Yeah, I tinker with hardware embarrassingly seldom and my impression was that it was very easy to work with. The screen, which was the issue, is designed to be replaced and I realized it was fixable when I was trying to figure out if I could replace it.
My impression was that they had never seen the model before and for some reason they weren't interested in trying. I think I talked to the shop owner and it wasn't at a chain store.
The actual screen had dislodged from its detachable frame so I glued it back to that. And the screen connector pins were a bit bent so I bent them back. Then it worked. Figuring out how the broken parts were supposed to fit together were a little bit finicky I suppose. If I hadn't launched it into a concrete wall it would've been easier to figure out.
Honestly, with a phone as easy to repair as Fairphone I don't really care that repair shops won't repair them. All I need to to be able to order a part.
Not certain which type of sensor it uses, but in any case painting it wouldn't fix it. The problem with a scratch is now it will register that as a fingerprint ridge, but it is in a fixed location, so theoretically if you re-register your finger on the scanner and always position your finger in *exactly* the same space it would still work, but as soon as your finger moves slightly, the scratches position relative to your fingerprint changes, thus changing the fingerprint that is read. You would have to fill the scratch with the same material that it is coated with, provided the scratch is just in the coating, and it isn't say a capacitive type which you've scratched part of that capacitive coating. Thus for a home-repair likely out of luck I'd think.
I could be wrong, any hardware guys please feel free to chime in over me.
Note: slightly simplified explanation but mostly holds for the three common types of sensors.
You could make an attempts using a scratch remover, which are available for scratched screens. There is some chance that it gets you there, though it depends on too many unknown variables to know for sure.
This. If it has the same index of refraction as the screen, it may fill in the damage and make it invisible. It might help to know if the screen is acrylic or glass to choose the right one. The poster has nothing to lose, sounds like.
> I brought it to my local repair shop. The owner had to tell me that they cannot repair Fairphone's, and that, for him, it is one of the worst companies to deal with.
This sounds like an odd & inconsistent story (from the repair shop guy - I'm not doubting your side of this, only his). Why would he need to be dealing directly with the company for any reason other than to purchase replaceable modules which are consumer-available & what would they be giving him trouble with specifically? Unless he's sending all his phones for repair back to the OEMs, but I'm sure that's not the case.
I wouldn't be surprised if some repair shops simply have a "mainstream brands only" blanket policy & don't consider other brands worth the time it takes to read about.
Otherwise you're right that the fingerprint module is specifically a bit of an achilles heel in their repairability. Even leaving aside the fingerprint reader isn't a separate component, it's also unclear to my why they made the decision not to sell the core module for standalone replacement (even if it ended up being quite expensive).
Sadly had a very similar experience about the screen of my FP4, which seems to have a serial fault of producing random inputs whenever it so pleases [1]. Knowing I had bought a phone with great self-service claims, I was confident they could just send me a replacement screen and I could swap it myself. But no, they insisted that I had to send it in, claiming that this would be better for the environment.
I do want to support Fairphone's mission and wish I could whole-heartedly recommend it to friends and family. But this experience and the many software issues have led me to recommend other options instead.
You can definitely buy the replacement screen for the FP4 as it's on their online shop. If you were going for repair under warranty it does seem odd not to just send you the part if you're happy installing it.
This is the problem with all of those „gadget but repairable” companies. It sounds great on paper, but the low adoption rate means that parts are hard to come by, the products get discontinued all the time, and your local electronics repair guy has never seen one of those before.
I also had an issue with the power button on my FP4, sadly it became stuck _on_ so the phone just bootlooped and was immediately unusable.
I ended up posting it for repair, over Christmas, which did take about 2 weeks but it was fully covered by the warranty.
I've successfully replaced the USB port after accidentally filling it with sand once, and that was trivial apart from UPS losing the package the first time. I really do appreciate the repairability, even if it could be better.
You're right that I maybe phrased it too harsh, the repairability _is_ a great feature. And of course, they do more by checking supply chains for some of the parts. The thing is, if your part is not available, you're stuck with their repair service. It surprises me they don't offer all parts.
Great though, that they resolved yours within the scheduled time!
At least it was the finger print scanner and not your finger that needs replacing. Biometrics as an EXTRA layer of security, on SHARED devices, makes sense. As a convenient replacement for passwords, on a personal device, net negative.
This is completely out of touch with the reality of the average user. The main causes of account theft continue to be phishing and data breaches which are easily exploited because most people reuse their passwords and will never stop doing so to use a password manager. Biometric passkeys are probably the only viable way to improve the situation.
Really? What about phone theft? If someone sticks you up and knows all it takes is your finger to unlock the phone, I would think they would be more tempted to do so, as it takes more or less the same level of coercion as taking the phone. And it's easier than fumbling around with a password... therein is the double edged sword...
Demanding a password introduces more error and more room for evasion than a finger, which as I said is about the same as getting the phone in the first place. You are right that in some, maybe even most cases, it may not make a difference. But when time is of the essence, additional obstacles are often simply avoided.
You also might ask who is sticking you up. For example, I believe there is fourth amendment literature re government officials that have gotten away with using an arrested persons biometrics to unlock a phone, in a manner in which compelling the release of a password would be illegal. Put another way, I can simply grab your finger or put your phone in front of your face, whereas beating you until you surrender your password is a lot harder to accomplish without creating additional consequences.
Still depends on your threat model. Not everyone lives in a place where stick-ups and random arrests are so common place that you want to inconvenience yourself 99.999% of the happy flow.
Indeed, good point. Proper threat modeling is everything.
This also explains my original reply to the ancestor comment. As I see it, most people's personal threat model essentially already accounts for data breaches to the point that they are almost irrelevant. We hear about them all the time. More and more people are learning about credit freezes or 2fa or just getting these services baked into things they already use (more banks offer free credit monitoring, 2fa is increasingly a standard). It seems like we are in a place where data breaches just become essentially background noise to the average user.
In my view then, I would personally factor in physical theft as a higher threat than "phishing and data breaches". Even if low probability to begin with.
There is also the objective question of which occurs more or incurs more damages to individuals, the answer to which I do not know. I know companies often spend a lot of money to fix problems or deal with lawsuits, but individuals don't really get compensated by that the way they would if someone who ripped your phone away from you was tackled to the ground and your property got returned. For example.
As you say though, the threat model is everything.
You've been trained to think it's a viable alternative to passwords. It's seems you even think it's "better". Little children can figure out how to bypass it on their own, and they don't even need to be especially clever. Hopefully you never have to learn first-hand the other ways it can make an already bad situation even worse.
This is a great project: the code is super neat and the write-up very clear. I like the sousveillance aspect of it!
For a project I needed a low-latency RTSP stream as well. When reading a video stream with OpenCV, the default video buffer is quite big, which, when filling up, makes the video lag behind a second or two. It then becomes impossible to perform any interaction on it.
I wasn't familiar with the setting you use to overcome this: setting cv2.CAP_PROP_BUFFERSIZE to 1 on the VideoCapture.
I am not sure, but you might get even lower latency by turning to OpenCV's GStreamer support. For me the trick was:
When testing, I also found out that the codec and image settings of the camera matter. With a h264 stream, the images came in batches of a number of frames, whereas MJPEG provided a more constant image stream with lower latency. Lastly, disabling 3D noise reduction also removed some delay.
I really like Zed, and I want to use it but I keep going back to VSCode when I need to be productive on my code instead of messing with my editor. I use both at the same time because Zed feels so much nicer, but so far, VSCode's features are quite a bit head.
I've been doing this for some time now and it indeed makes editing text in vim easy. Just `dd` and `p`. And as the article mentions, diffing is much cleaner.
There's a caveat however, if you comment a line (to keep the thought, but see how it would work without) some Markdown parsers will interpret it as an empty line, and thus create a new paragraph. It then becomes necessary to remove one of the semantic newlines, which looks rather messy.
As a Colemak (DH) user for ~5 years, I share these experiences.
I did a monkeytype benchmark before switching, and I still barely hit the same numbers, so it's certainly not a magic fix for more typing speed. What is left then is the argument concerning ergonomics: which I am not sure is worth the trade-offs.
Every time I now sit at another's computer I am unable to type without glancing at the keyboard. Moreover, I am trying to switch to (n)vim, and am completely at a loss navigating, as the hjkl keys are now scattered across the keyboard -- beating their purpose.
[0]: https://bower.sh/you-might-not-need-tmux