upvote
Are we reading the same article? OP is saying LLMs let normies tweak their personal workflows in the same way we emacs nerds had been doing for decades. Contrary to the old saw about it being an OS, Emacs is really just a shell but with lisp as its command language instead of unwieldy bash. Once Claude magicked an English to bash translator, raw shell has caught up to emacs in its ease of use.
reply
The new thing where everyone just vibe codes their own versions of everything is not at all like personalizing Emacs.

Specifically the idea that people generally just ignore existing versions of packages and make their own has never been the case, especially compared to other editors (even VSCode).

> There are popular elisp packages lots of people use. But except for Magit, nerds are alarmingly apt to replace them with their own shinier versions (and then to show them off, transitioning to the spore-forming phase of the elisp lifecycle). Everything in Emacs is malleable.

> Until now, the Achilles heel of Emacs culture has been that, except for Magit, its packages tend to be wretched user experiences. Ugly, slow, and discoverable only after inflicting years of elisp cortical injuries on yourself.

reply
> or now pi

I have never heard of such an editor, and the name is exquisitely unsearchable. Even if I explicitly try to tell the search engine that I'm looking for a text editor that's a variant of vim, I just get results about using vim on a Raspberry Pi.

reply
Seriously, your idea here is maybe you can start an Emacs vs. vi fight in the comment threads?
reply
No one mentioned vi, I like neovim just fine, and I'm using pi daily. Nice try though. My only point is that if you want to talk about rewriting everything yourself, NIH, churn, whatever you want to call it, Emacs is absolutely not a great example.
reply
> No one mentioned vi

But you mentioned multiple variants thereof, in the context of a thread about Emacs.

It's highly disingenuous to suppose that this doesn't count.

reply