It means it has a dependency on X11.

  $ go install github.com/ramonvermeulen/whosthere@latest
  # golang.design/x/clipboard
  clipboard_linux.c:14:10: fatal error: X11/Xlib.h: No such file or directory
    14 | #include <X11/Xlib.h>
       |          ^~~~~~~~~~~~
  compilation terminated.

Yikes, so it's a "TUI" app... that still requires a display server? So I can't run this TUI over SSH or a virtual terminal. Wondering what the point of a tui is that still requires a gui environment to run?

Sorry, I was unhelpfully flippant. You totally can, and I don't want to distract from the great app that has been shared. This bug was just a compile time issue, which needed X libs to bake in clipboard support which is optional at runtime.

this stopped me from go installing it too on nixos. I'm not gonna put the effort in to run it.

There should be a build tag to disable clipboard, that'd be the easiest way around this.

Same, I also had the same issue on NixOS :)

I think this is only a problem when building from source, right? It is indeed because of the dependency on https://github.com/golang-design/clipboard.

I hesitated a bit bringing in this feature. On one hand, I really like to have clipboard support, on the other hand, I don't like that it requires you to change from static to dynamic linking (and have the x11 dependency).

Maybe I could write an install.sh script for installation that detects the OS and fetches the correct version/tarball from the Github release.

That library isn't going to support Wayland any time soon, and requiring CGO isn't ideal IMO. See this bug, https://github.com/golang-design/clipboard/issues/6

How about this PR? https://github.com/ramonvermeulen/whosthere/pull/29

It switches to using github.com/dece2183/go-clipboard, which supports Mac, Windows, Linux (X11 + Wayland) and Android.

Thanks a lot for your contribution, this is something I will look into in the upcoming days. I totally agree that CGO isn't ideal, I had to make the build/release process also a lot more complicated purely for that clipboard requirement (see GHAs and the different goreleaser files).

On the other hand, I also don't want whosthere to be depended on a fork that isn't maintained anymore. I will think about this trade-off, but I am also interested how others look at this problem.

What's modern about Wayland?

I'm willing to bet they were the first user to try and add example.com to their Outlook account, and MS then just assigned it to them without verifying they own the domain.

API usage would cost me >$1000 p/m for personal/hobby projects. I really like Anthropic models, but I do not want to pay-per-call and I prefer opencode to CC.

I have no moral issues with using the client of my choice, despite it being against their TOS.

Yes, it can.

Can confirm, I just signed up /because/ of this announcement.

I think there are better ways of admitting you didn't even manage to watch the first few mins of the video.

I think you've confused issues in society with kinetic war.

One mainly, although not always, harms individual wellbeing, whilst the other causes mass death and lines on the map to change.

Hopefully you can work out which is which.

"Hello, this is Lenny" - well known Asterisk configuration from 20 years ago.

And, “They have been carried away by monkeys!”

I got curious about how many wheelbarrows of cash $20bn actually is.

Two ways to think about it: weight vs volume.

By weight (assuming all $100 bills):

$20,000,000,000 / $100 = 200,000,000 bills

Each bill is roughly 1g, so total mass is ~200,000 kg

A typical builder’s wheelbarrow can take about 100 kg before it becomes unmanageable

200,000 kg total / 100 kg per wheelbarrow ≈ 2,000 wheelbarrows (weight limit)

By volume:

A $100 bill is ~6.14" × 2.61" × 0.11 mm, which comes out to about 102 cm³ per bill

200,000,000 bills × 102 cm³ ≈ 20,400 m³ of cash

A standard wheelbarrow holds around 0.08 m³ (80 litres)

20,400 m³ total / 0.08 m³ per wheelbarrow ≈ 255,000 wheelbarrows (volume limit)

So,

About 2,000 wheelbarrows if you only care about weight

About 255,000 wheelbarrows if you actually have to fit the cash in

So the limiting factor isn’t how heavy the money is; it’s that the physical volume of the cash is absurd. At this scale, $20bn in $100s is effectively a warehouse, not a stack.

I think your volume per bill should be 6.14 * 0.0254 * 2.61 * 0.0254 * 0.00011 ≈ 1.137e-6 m³. That means about 227 m³ total volume, or about 2800 wheelbarrows.

Something wrong about representing the weight of US dollars in metric units.

They should have converted to Euros first.

> Something wrong about representing the weight of US dollars in metric units.

The traditional unit of measure of truckloads of money is (drum roll) a dump truck. A large dump truck holds 16-20 cubic yards.

https://www.catdumptruck.com/standard-dump-truck-size-chart/

Then what do you say to 6.14" × 2.61" × 0.11 mm = 102 cm³

How many pounds is it? Whos on first?

The movie Blow had a scene about the logistics dealing with tons of cash. Even before thinking about laundering, it’s a huge PITA.

I think you’re off by about a factor of 100 on the volume of a single bill. So both cases it’s in the ballpark of 2000 wheelbarrows.

A better way to think of it is: If you got a dollar a second for the next 63 years, you still would not have gotten $2B.

Your volume of a single bill is a bit off.

Or, rather, you have more time to execute it. They _will_ rug pull again, this is Microsoft ffs.

It's the classic strategy of floating an extreme change, "listening to feedback", and then coming back later with the price they intended to charge all along.

That's the signal I'm getting here and they're not even being coy about it, they're just postponing some form of inevitable price increase.