immediately though of like three different jokes all involving raw dogging flights but am electing to spare you all of them

the prohibition against talking on the phone during flights feels pyrrhic at this point considering there's apparently no prohibition on having your phone constantly talking on speaker mode

i have googled this question at least twice and still don't remember the answer

All this churn can make people anxious, but that's just getting caught up in the details. The only thing I worry for myself are long term effects where I actively made myself stupider without intention. Like the way social media did.

lucumr.pocoo.org/2026/1/18/a...

putting aside what specifically obligated means, as well as what constitutes a derivative work, this feels unanswerable, given that the training data likely contains code with a variety of incompatible licenses, all of which had a causal role in the output

makes sense, I posted in the questions channel

i dont think i have the right to do this. from what im reading i may be able to license my integration code as AGPL though but im not confident i understand that correctly. likely i should just ask felix or alex what they think

is also dataflowy

ya im not particularly interested in what's technically allowed compared to the spirit either but thats not at all clear to me either, if anything less so. it seems simple enough if youre starting something new over which you have control, but otherwise it seems complicated

ya thats what i gathered which seems difficult to impossible for something with 100+ contributors and an existing (MIT) license. though i am still not totally clear what deploy connotes. like does loading it via a script tag in hazel mean that hazel must be relicensed?

ah interesting. i understand basically nothing about software copyright and after 10 minutes of reading i feel none the wiser, other than it sounds complicated and fraught. might have to keep this one as a personal experiment and away from the main repo

so in short still an active investigation for me. one awkwardness is switching between text and mouse/touch driven modalities... i think to feel truly good, both the base editor and the embedded GUIs need thoughtful dedicated mouse/touch and keyboard controls

(b) more canvas-style combinators where you can take an subtree of code, and 'punch holes' in it corresponding to sub-subtrees or sub-GUIs. this replaces the whole subtree with a canvas on which the punched holes can be freely positioned

together these can be used for fun layouts. but sometimes they are overly constraining. other things i am actively investigating: (a) first class combinator UIs that are basically flexbox and grid, and which bottom out as editors, so you can use them to arrange whatever

short answer, yes, but i'm exploring different options. right now there are two inline style for multiline affordance in the code; Tab (pictured) where the code resumes on the same line it stopped on and Block (where code resumes at the bottom). also an offside disp option (the players at bottom)

already we are passing continuations: nitter.net/nostalgebrai...

unironically, monadic foundations for agent harnesses are a good idea to move past the naive 'loop' formulation

develop a perfect fractal ontology, growing forever outwards and inwards. make no mistakes