Full Width 
Shortcuts 
Sign Up 
Log In 
Articles 
Reading List More from Making software better without sacrificing user experience.
Bringing dwm Shortcuts to GNOME 2023-11-02 The dwm window manager is my standard "go-to" for most of my personal laptop environments. For desktops with larger, higher resolution monitors I tend to lean towards using GNOME. The GNOME DE is fairly solid for my own purposes. This article isn't going to deep dive into GNOME itself, but instead highlight some minor configuration changes I make to mimic a few dwm shortcuts. For reference, I'm running GNOME 45.0 on Ubuntu 23.10 Setting Up Fixed Workspaces When I use dwm I tend to have a hard-set amount of tags to cycle through (normally 4-5). Unfortunately, dynamic rendering is the default for workspaces (ie. tags) in GNOME. For my personal preference I set this setting to fixed. We can achieve this by opening Settings > Multitasking and selecting "Fixed number of workspaces". Screenshot of GNOME's Multitasking Settings GUI Setting Our Keybindings Now all that is left is to mimic dwm keyboard shortcuts, in this case: ALT + $num for switching between workspaces and ALT + SHIFT + $num for moving windows across workspaces. These keyboard shortcuts can be altered under Settings > Keyboard > View and Customize Shortcuts > Navigation. You'll want to make edits to both the "Switch to workspace n" and "Move window to workspace n". Screenshot of GNOME's keyboard shortcut GUI: switch to workspace Screenshot of GNOME's keyboard shortcut GUI: move window to workspace That's it. You're free to include even more custom keyboard shortcuts (open web browser, lock screen, hibernate, etc.) but this is a solid starting point. Enjoy tweaking GNOME!
The X220 ThinkPad is the Best Laptop in the World 2023-09-26 The X220 ThinkPad is the greatest laptop ever made and you're wrong if you think otherwise. No laptop hardware has since surpassed the nearly perfect build of the X220. New devices continue to get thinner and more fragile. Useful ports are constantly discarded for the sake of "design". Functionality is no longer important to manufacturers. Repairability is purposefully removed to prevent users from truly "owing" their hardware. It's a mess out there. But thank goodness I still have my older, second-hand X220. Specs Before I get into the details explaining why this laptop is the very best of its kind, let's first take a look at my machine's basic specifications: CPU: Intel i7-2640M (4) @ 3.500GHz GPU: Intel 2nd Generation Core Processor Memory: 16GB DDR3 OS: Arch Linux / OpenBSD Resolution: 1366x768 With that out of the way, I will break down my thoughts on the X220 into five major sections: Build quality, available ports, the keyboard, battery life, and repairability. Build Quality The X220 (like most of Lenovo's older X/T models) is built like a tank. Although sourced from mostly plastic, the device is still better equipped to handle drops and mishandling compared to that of more fragile devices (such as the MacBook Air or Framework). This is made further impressive since the X220 is actually composed of many smaller interconnected pieces (more on this later). A good litmus test I perform on most laptops is the "corner test". You grab the base corner of a laptop in its open state. The goal is to see if the device displays any noticeable give or flex. In the X220's case: it feels rock solid. The base remains stiff and bobbing the device causes no movement on the opened screen. I'm aware that holding a laptop in this position is certainly not a normal use case, but knowing it is built well enough to do so speaks volumes of its construction. The X220 is also not a lightweight laptop. This might be viewed as a negative for most users, but I actually prefer it. I often become too cautious and end up "babying" thinner laptops out of fear of breakage. A minor drop from even the smallest height will severely damage these lighter devices. I have no such worries with my X220. As for the laptop's screen and resolution: your mileage may vary. I have zero issues with the default display or the smaller aspect ratio. I wrote about how I stopped using an external monitor, so I might be a little biased. Overall, this laptop is a device you can snatch up off your desk, whip into your travel bag and be on your way. The rugged design and bulkier weight help put my mind at ease - which is something I can't say for newer laptop builds. Ports Ports. Ports Everywhere. I don't think I need to explain how valuable it is to have functional ports on a laptop. Needing to carrying around a bunch of dongles for ports that should already be on the device just seems silly. The X220 comes equipped with: 3 USB ports (one of those being USB3 on the i7 model) DisplayPort VGA Ethernet SD Card Reader 3.5mm Jack Ultrabay (SATA) Wi-Fi hardware kill-switch Incredibly versatile and ready for anything I throw at it! Keyboard The classic ThinkPad keyboards are simply that: classic. I don't think anyone could argue against these keyboards being the golden standard for laptops. It's commendable how Lenovo managed to package so much functionality into such a small amount of real estate. Most modern laptops lack helpful keys such as Print Screen, Home, End, and Screen Lock. They're also an absolute joy to type on. The fact that so many people go out of their way to mod X230 ThinkPad models with X220 keyboards should tell you something... Why Lenovo moved away from these keyboards will always baffle me. (I know why they did it - I just think it's stupid). Did I mention these classic keyboards come with the extremely useful Trackpoint as well? Battery Life Author's Note: This section is very subjective. The age, quality, and size of the X220's battery can have a massive impact on benchmarks. I should also mention that I run very lightweight operating systems and use DWM as opposed to a heavier desktop environment. Just something to keep in mind. The battery life on my own X220 is fantastic. I have a brand-new 9-cell that lasts for roughly 5-6 hours of daily work. Obviously these numbers don't come close to the incredible battery life of Apple's M1/M2 chip devices, but it's still quite competitive against other "newer" laptops on the market. Although, even if the uptime was lower than 5-6 hours, you have the ability to carry extra batteries with you. The beauty of swapping out your laptop's battery without needing to open up the device itself is fantastic. Others might whine about the annoyance of carrying an extra battery in their travel bag, but doing so is completely optional. A core part of what makes the X220 so wonderful is user control and choice. The X220's battery is another great example of that. Repairability The ability to completely disassemble and replace almost everything on the X220 has to be one of its biggest advantages over newer laptops. No glue to rip apart. No special proprietary tools required. Just some screws and plastic snaps. If someone as monkey-brained as me can completely strip down this laptop and put it back together again without issue, then the hardware designers have done something right! Best of all, Lenovo provides a very detailed hardware maintenance manual to help guide you through the entire process. My disassembled X220 when I was reapplying the CPU thermal paste. Bonus Round: Price I didn't list this in my initial section "breakdown" but it's something to consider. I purchased my X220 off eBay for $175 Canadian. While this machine came with a HDD instead of an SSD and only 8GB of total memory, that was still an incredible deal. I simply swapped out the hard-drive with an SSD I had on hand, along with upgrading the DDR3 memory to its max of 16. Even if you needed to buy those components separately you would be hard-pressed to find such a good deal for a decent machine. Not to mention you would be helping to prevent more e-waste! What More Can I Say? Obviously the title and tone of this article is all in good fun. Try not to take things so seriously! But, I still personally believe the X220 is one of, if not the best laptop in the world.
Installing Older Versions of MongoDB on Arch Linux 2023-09-11 I've recently been using Arch Linux for my main work environment on my ThinkPad X260. It's been great. As someone who is constantly drawn to minimalist operating systems such as Alpine or OpenBSD, it's nice to use something like Arch that boasts that same minimalist approach but with greater documentation/support. Another major reason for the switch was the need to run older versions of "services" locally. Most people would simply suggest using Docker or vmm, but I personally run projects in self-contained, personalized directories on my system itself. I am aware of the irony in that statement... but that's just my personal preference. So I thought I would share my process of setting up an older version of MongoDB (3.4 to be precise) on Arch Linux. AUR to the Rescue You will need to target the specific version of MongoDB using the very awesome AUR packages: yay -S mongodb34-bin Follow the instructions and you'll be good to go. Don't forget to create the /data/db directory and give it proper permissions: mkdir -p /data/db/ chmod -R 777 /date/db What About My "Tools"? If you plan to use MongoDB, then you most likely want to utilize the core database tools (restore, dump, etc). The problem is you can't use the default mongodb-tools package when trying to work with older versions of MongoDB itself. The package will complain about conflicts and ask you to override your existing version. This is not what we want. So, you'll have to build from source locally: git clone https://github.com/mongodb/mongo-tools cd mongodb-tools ./make build Then you'll need to copy the built executables into the proper directory in order to use them from the terminal: cp bin/* /usr/local/bin/ And that's it! Now you can run mongod directly or use systemctl to enable it by default. Hopefully this helps anyone else curious about running older (or even outdated!) versions of MongoDB.
Blogging for 7 Years 2023-06-24 My first public article was posted on June 28th 2016. That was seven years ago. In that time, quite a lot has changed in my life both personally and professionally. So, I figured it would be interesting to reflect on these years and document it for my own personal records. My hope is that this is something I could start doing every 5 or 10 years (if I can keep going that long!). This way, my blog also serves as a "time capsule" or museum of the past... Fun Facts This Blog: I originally started blogging on bradleytaunt.com using WordPress, but since then I have changed both my main domain and blog infrastructure multiple times. At a glance I have used: Jekyll Hugo Blot Static HTML/CSS PHPetite Shinobi pblog barf Currently using! Personal: As with anyone over time, the personal side of my life has seen the biggest updates: Married the love of my life (after knowing each other for ~14 years!) Moved out into rural Ontario for some peace and quiet Had three wonderful kids with said wife (two boys and a girl) Started noticing grey sprinkles in my stubble (I guess I can officially call myself a "grey beard"?) Professionally: Pivoted heavily into UX research and design for a handful of years (after working mostly with web front-ends) Recently switched back into a more fullstack development role to challenge myself and learn more Nothing Special This post isn't anything ground-breaking but for me it's nice to reflect on the time passed and remember how much can change in such little time. Hopefully I'll be right back here in another 7 years and maybe you'll still be reading along with me!
More in programming
The world changed a lot in 1995. And for the web, it was a transformational year. The post 1995 Was the Most Important Year for the Web appeared first on The History of the Web.
I have a lot in the works for the this month's Logic for Programmers release. Among other things, I'm completely rewriting the chapter on Logic Programming Languages. I originally showcased the paradigm with puzzle solvers, like eight queens or four-coloring. Lots of other demos do this too! It takes creativity and insight for humans to solve them, so a program doing it feels magical. But I'm trying to write a book about practical techniques and I want everything I talk about to be useful. So in v0.9 I'll be replacing these examples with a couple of new programs that might get people thinking that Prolog could help them in their day-to-day work. On the other hand, for a newsletter, showcasing a puzzle solver is pretty cool. And recently I stumbled into this post by my friend Pablo Meier, where he solves a videogame puzzle with Prolog:1 Summary for the text-only readers: We have a test with 10 true/false questions (denoted a/b) and four student attempts. Given the scores of the first three students, we have to figure out the fourth student's score. bbababbabb = 7 baaababaaa = 5 baaabbbaba = 3 bbaaabbaaa = ??? You can see Pablo's solution here, and try it in SWI-prolog here. Pretty cool! But after way too long studying Prolog just to write this dang book chapter, I wanted to see if I could do it more elegantly than him. Code and puzzle spoilers to follow. (Normally here's where I'd link to a gentler introduction I wrote but I think this is my first time writing about Prolog online? Uh here's a Picat intro instead) The Program You can try this all online at SWISH or just jump to my final version here. :- use_module(library(dif)). % Sound inequality :- use_module(library(clpfd)). % Finite domain constraints First some imports. dif lets us write dif(A, B), which is true if A and B are not equal. clpfd lets us write A #= B + 1 to say "A is 1 more than B".2 We'll say both the student submission and the key will be lists, where each value is a or b. In Prolog, lowercase identifiers are atoms (like symbols in other languages) and identifiers that start with a capital are variables. Prolog finds values for variables that match equations (unification). The pattern matching is real real good. % ?- means query ?- L = [a,B,c], [Y|X] = [1,2|L], B + 1 #= 7. B = 6, L = [a, 6, c], X = [2, a, 6, c], Y = 1 Next, we define score/33 recursively. % The student's test score % score(student answers, answer key, score) score([], [], 0). score([A|As], [A|Ks], N) :- N #= M + 1, score(As, Ks, M). score([A|As], [K|Ks], N) :- dif(A, K), score(As, Ks, N). First key is the student's answers, second is the answer key, third is the final score. The base case is the empty test, which has score 0. Otherwise, we take the head values of each list and compare them. If they're the same, we add one to the score, otherwise we keep the same score. Notice we couldn't write if x then y else z, we instead used pattern matching to effectively express (x && y) || (!x && z). Prolog does have a conditional operator, but it prevents backtracking so what's the point??? A quick break about bidirectionality One of the coolest things about Prolog: all purely logical predicates are bidirectional. We can use score to check if our expected score is correct: ?- score([a, b, b], [b, b, b], 2). true But we can also give it answers and a key and ask it for the score: ?- score([a, b, b], [b, b, b], X). X = 2 Or we could give it a key and a score and ask "what test answers would have this score?" ?- score(X, [b, b, b], 2). X = [b, b, _A], dif(_A,b) X = [b, _A, b], dif(_A,b) X = [_A, b, b], dif(_A,b) The different value is written _A because we never told Prolog that the array can only contain a and b. We'll fix this later. Okay back to the program Now that we have a way of computing scores, we want to find a possible answer key that matches all of our observations, ie gives everybody the correct scores. key(Key) :- % Figure it out score([b, b, a, b, a, b, b, a, b, b], Key, 7), score([b, a, a, a, b, a, b, a, a, a], Key, 5), score([b, a, a, a, b, b, b, a, b, a], Key, 3). So far we haven't explicitly said that the Key length matches the student answer lengths. This is implicitly verified by score (both lists need to be empty at the same time) but it's a good idea to explicitly add length(Key, 10) as a clause of key/1. We should also explicitly say that every element of Key is either a or b.4 Now we could write a second predicate saying Key had the right 'type': keytype([]). keytype([K|Ks]) :- member(K, [a, b]), keytype(Ks). But "generating lists that match a constraint" is a thing that comes up often enough that we don't want to write a separate predicate for each constraint! So after some digging, I found a more elegant solution: maplist. Let L=[l1, l2]. Then maplist(p, L) is equivalent to the clause p(l1), p(l2). It also accepts partial predicates: maplist(p(x), L) is equivalent to p(x, l1), p(x, l2). So we could write5 contains(L, X) :- member(X, L). key(Key) :- length(Key, 10), maplist(contains([a,b]), L), % the score stuff Now, let's query for the Key: ?- key(Key) Key = [a, b, a, b, a, a, b, a, a, b] Key = [b, b, a, b, a, a, a, a, a, b] Key = [b, b, a, b, a, a, b, b, a, b] Key = [b, b, b, b, a, a, b, a, a, b] So there are actually four different keys that all explain our data. Does this mean the puzzle is broken and has multiple different answers? Nope The puzzle wasn't to find out what the answer key was, the point was to find the fourth student's score. And if we query for it, we see all four solutions give him the same score: ?- key(Key), score([b, b, a, a, a, b, b, a, a, a], Key, X). X = 6 X = 6 X = 6 X = 6 Huh! I really like it when puzzles look like they're broken, but every "alternate" solution still gives the same puzzle answer. Total program length: 15 lines of code, compared to the original's 80 lines. Suck it, Pablo. (Incidentally, you can get all of the answer at once by writing findall(X, (key(Key), score($answer-array, Key, X)), L).) I still don't like puzzles for teaching The actual examples I'm using in the book are "analyzing a version control commit graph" and "planning a sequence of infrastructure changes", which are somewhat more likely to occur at work than needing to solve a puzzle. You'll see them in the next release! I found it because he wrote Gamer Games for Lite Gamers as a response to my Gamer Games for Non-Gamers. ↩ These are better versions of the core Prolog expressions \+ (A = B) and A is B + 1, because they can defer unification. ↩ Prolog-descendants have a convention of writing the arity of the function after its name, so score/3 means "score has three parameters". I think they do this because you can overload predicates with multiple different arities. Also Joe Armstrong used Prolog for prototyping, so Erlang and Elixir follow the same convention. ↩ It still gets the right answers without this type restriction, but I had no idea it did until I checked for myself. Probably better not to rely on this! ↩ We could make this even more compact by using a lambda function. First import module yall, then write maplist([X]>>member(X, [a,b]), Key). But (1) it's not a shorter program because you replace the extra definition with an extra module import, and (2) yall is SWI-Prolog specific and not an ISO-standard prolog module. Using contains is more portable. ↩
Startup CEOs should ask themselves what crazy ideas can turn into a move that just ends a market's competitive dynamic
We just opened a search for a new junior programmer at 37signals. It's been years since we last hired a junior, but the real reason the listing is turning heads is because we're open about the yearly salary: $145,849*. That's high enough that programmers with lots of experience are asking whether they could apply, even if they aren't technically "junior". The answer is no. The reason we're willing to pay a junior more than most is because we're looking for a junior who's better than most. Not better in "what do they already know", but in "how far could they go". We're hiring for peak promise — and such promise only remains until it's revealed. Maybe it sounds a little harsh, but a programmer who's been working professionally for five years has likely already revealed their potential. What you're going to get is roughly what you see. That doesn't mean that people can't get better after that, but it means that the trajectory by which they improve has already been plotted. Whereas a programmer who's either straight out of school or fresh off their first internship or short-stint job is essentially all potential. So you draw their line on the basis of just a few early dots, but the line can be steep. It's not that different from something like the NFL scouting combine. Teams fight to find the promise of The Next All-Star. These rookies won't have the experience that someone who's already played in the league for years would have, but they have the potential to be the best. Someone who's already played for several seasons will have shown what they have and be weighed accordingly. This is not easy to do! Plenty of rookies, in sports and programming, may show some early potential, then fail to elevate their game to where the buyer is betting it could be. But that's the chance you take to land someone extraordinary. So if you know a junior programmer with less than three years of industry experience who is sparkling with potential, do let them know of our listing. And if you know someone awesome who's already a senior programmer, we also have an opening for them. *It's a funnily precise number because it's pulled directly from the Radford salary database, which we query for the top 10% of San Francisco salaries for junior programmers.
Data engineering is a field I would categorize as a subspecialty of software engineering. It shares the same concerns as software engineering—scalability, maintainability, and other “-ilities”—but its primary focus is on data. It’s a unique discipline because data is inherently messy, and as a result, no standard enterprise framework has emerged to dominate the space—and […]
