I rewatched Wes Anderson’s 2009 film Fantastic Mr. Fox again and I have to say that it might be my very favorite of his films. Now, I get it if you don’t like Anderson. It’s an aesthetic alright and if it isn’t yours, you probably find him unbearable. As for the films being all the same, well, that’s not uncommon of many directors, so I don’t have a lot of patience for that argument. It’s just that you don’t like the films being all the same in this kind of way. Again, that’s OK. I admit that his whimsy and put-ons have varying degrees of effectiveness over a now pretty long career. But I do like it when Anderson turns to animation and his adaptation of Roald Dahl’s story is pretty great. For one, George Clooney is absolutely perfect as the fox. The combination of ridiculousness, arrogance, and male ego works very well and Clooney can really deliver that. Meryl Streep as Mrs. Fox is almost as good, though she’s asked to do less. Of course Jason Schwartzmann, Bill Murray, and Owen Wilson show up doing basically their normal thing in a different role. I am amused at Brian Cox as the reporter. Willem Dafoe as the rat is great too. And I happen to love the animation, though I confess to being no expert on the subject and having not nearly as much knowledge as anyone who cares about the topic in any more than a passing way. I’m surprised this didn’t make a ton of money, though it did generate a small profit at the time that has grown over the years. Anyway, it’s highly enjoyable. After all, we are all just wild animals.

The post LGM Film Club, Part 497: Fantastic Mr. Fox appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

From the Beetle to the Rabbit to the Golf, Volkswagen has long made affordable, practical cars that those with smaller budgets can afford. Now they're aiming that prowess at the EV market with the unveiling of their ID EVERY1.

The concept car is intended to make the transition into production for €20,000 (USD $21,667) in 2027. Hailed as "affordable entry-level all-electric mobility" by Thomas Schäfer, CEO of Volkswagen Passenger Cars, the 94hp vehicle will reportedly have a range of 155 miles.

Aesthetically, the vehicle was designed to have a friendly, approachable look. "Our ambition was to create something bold yet accessible," says Andreas Mindt, Volkswagen's Head of Design. "The ID EVERY1 has a self-assured appearance but remains likeable – thanks to details such as the dynamic front lights and the 'smiling' rear. These design elements make it more than just a car: they give it character and an identity that people can relate to."

The big question for Americans is whether that €20,000 sticker will apply in 2027, given the way our current administration's tariff war is going. The point may be moot; sadly, VW has announced no plans to bring this affordable EV to the U.S. market. With any luck things will change in two years' time.

I was talking to a friend about how to add a directory to your PATH today. It’s something that feels “obvious” to me since I’ve been using the terminal for a long time, but when I searched for instructions for how to do it, I actually couldn’t find something that explained all of the steps – a lot of them just said “add this to ~/.bashrc”, but what if you’re not using bash? What if your bash config is actually in a different file? And how are you supposed to figure out which directory to add anyway?

So I wanted to try to write down some more complete directions and mention some of the gotchas I’ve run into over the years.

Here’s a table of contents:

• step 1: what shell are you using?
• step 2: find your shell’s config file
  • a note on bash’s config file
• step 3: figure out which directory to add
  • step 3.1: double check it’s the right directory
• step 4: edit your shell config
• step 5: restart your shell
• problems:
  • problem 1: it ran the wrong program
  • problem 2: the program isn’t being run from your shell
  • problem 3: duplicate PATH entries making it harder to debug
  • problem 4: losing your history after updating your PATH
• notes:
  • a note on source
  • a note on fish_add_path

step 1: what shell are you using?

If you’re not sure what shell you’re using, here’s a way to find out. Run this:

ps -p $$ -o pid,comm=

• if you’re using bash, it’ll print out 97295 bash
• if you’re using zsh, it’ll print out 97295 zsh
• if you’re using fish, it’ll print out an error like “In fish, please use $fish_pid” ($$ isn’t valid syntax in fish, but in any case the error message tells you that you’re using fish, which you probably already knew)

Also bash is the default on Linux and zsh is the default on Mac OS (as of 2024). I’ll only cover bash, zsh, and fish in these directions.

step 2: find your shell’s config file

• in zsh, it’s probably ~/.zshrc
• in bash, it might be ~/.bashrc, but it’s complicated, see the note in the next section
• in fish, it’s probably ~/.config/fish/config.fish (you can run echo $__fish_config_dir if you want to be 100% sure)

a note on bash’s config file

Bash has three possible config files: ~/.bashrc, ~/.bash_profile, and ~/.profile.

If you’re not sure which one your system is set up to use, I’d recommend testing this way:

1. add echo hi there to your ~/.bashrc
2. Restart your terminal
3. If you see “hi there”, that means ~/.bashrc is being used! Hooray!
4. Otherwise remove it and try the same thing with ~/.bash_profile
5. You can also try ~/.profile if the first two options don’t work.

(there are a lot of elaborate flow charts out there that explain how bash decides which config file to use but IMO it’s not worth it to internalize them and just testing is the fastest way to be sure)

step 3: figure out which directory to add

Let’s say that you’re trying to install and run a program called http-server and it doesn’t work, like this:

$ npm install -g http-server
$ http-server
bash: http-server: command not found

How do you find what directory http-server is in? Honestly in general this is not that easy – often the answer is something like “it depends on how npm is configured”. A few ideas:

• Often when setting up a new installer (like cargo, npm, homebrew, etc), when you first set it up it’ll print out some directions about how to update your PATH. So if you’re paying attention you can get the directions then.
• Sometimes installers will automatically update your shell’s config file to update your PATH for you
• Sometimes just Googling “where does npm install things?” will turn up the answer
• Some tools have a subcommand that tells you where they’re configured to install things, like:
  • Node/npm: npm config get prefix (then append /bin/)
  • Go: go env GOPATH (then append /bin/)
  • asdf: asdf info | grep ASDF_DIR (then append /bin/ and /shims/)

step 3.1: double check it’s the right directory

Once you’ve found a directory you think might be the right one, make sure it’s actually correct! For example, I found out that on my machine, http-server is in ~/.npm-global/bin. I can make sure that it’s the right directory by trying to run the program http-server in that directory like this:

$ ~/.npm-global/bin/http-server
Starting up http-server, serving ./public

It worked! Now that you know what directory you need to add to your PATH, let’s move to the next step!

step 4: edit your shell config

Now we have the 2 critical pieces of information we need:

1. Which directory you’re trying to add to your PATH (like ~/.npm-global/bin/)
2. Where your shell’s config is (like ~/.bashrc, ~/.zshrc, or ~/.config/fish/config.fish)

Now what you need to add depends on your shell:

bash instructions:

Open your shell’s config file, and add a line like this:

export PATH=$PATH:~/.npm-global/bin/

(obviously replace ~/.npm-global/bin with the actual directory you’re trying to add)

zsh instructions:

You can do the same thing as in bash, but zsh also has some slightly fancier syntax you can use if you prefer:

path=(
  $path
  ~/.npm-global/bin
)

fish instructions:

In fish, the syntax is different:

set PATH $PATH ~/.npm-global/bin

(in fish you can also use fish_add_path, some notes on that further down)

step 5: restart your shell

Now, an extremely important step: updating your shell’s config won’t take effect if you don’t restart it!

Two ways to do this:

1. open a new terminal (or terminal tab), and maybe close the old one so you don’t get confused
2. Run bash to start a new shell (or zsh if you’re using zsh, or fish if you’re using fish)

I’ve found that both of these usually work fine.

And you should be done! Try running the program you were trying to run and hopefully it works now.

If not, here are a couple of problems that you might run into:

problem 1: it ran the wrong program

If the wrong version of a program is running, you might need to add the directory to the beginning of your PATH instead of the end.

For example, on my system I have two versions of python3 installed, which I can see by running which -a:

$ which -a python3
/usr/bin/python3
/opt/homebrew/bin/python3

The one your shell will use is the first one listed.

If you want to use the Homebrew version, you need to add that directory (/opt/homebrew/bin) to the beginning of your PATH instead, by putting this in your shell’s config file (it’s /opt/homebrew/bin/:$PATH instead of the usual $PATH:/opt/homebrew/bin/)

export PATH=/opt/homebrew/bin/:$PATH

or in fish:

set PATH ~/.cargo/bin $PATH

problem 2: the program isn’t being run from your shell

All of these directions only work if you’re running the program from your shell. If you’re running the program from an IDE, from a GUI, in a cron job, or some other way, you’ll need to add the directory to your PATH in a different way, and the exact details might depend on the situation.

in a cron job

Some options:

• use the full path to the program you’re running, like /home/bork/bin/my-program
• put the full PATH you want as the first line of your crontab (something like PATH=/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/local/bin:….). You can get the full PATH you’re using in your shell by running echo "PATH=$PATH".

I’m honestly not sure how to handle it in an IDE/GUI because I haven’t run into that in a long time, will add directions here if someone points me in the right direction.

problem 3: duplicate PATH entries making it harder to debug

If you edit your path and start a new shell by running bash (or zsh, or fish), you’ll often end up with duplicate PATH entries, because the shell keeps adding new things to your PATH every time you start your shell.

Personally I don’t think I’ve run into a situation where this kind of duplication breaks anything, but the duplicates can make it harder to debug what’s going on with your PATH if you’re trying to understand its contents.

Some ways you could deal with this:

1. If you’re debugging your PATH, open a new terminal to do it in so you get a “fresh” state. This should avoid the duplication.
2. Deduplicate your PATH at the end of your shell’s config (for example in zsh apparently you can do this with typeset -U path)
3. Check that the directory isn’t already in your PATH when adding it (for example in fish I believe you can do this with fish_add_path --path /some/directory)

How to deduplicate your PATH is shell-specific and there isn’t always a built in way to do it so you’ll need to look up how to accomplish it in your shell.

problem 4: losing your history after updating your PATH

Here’s a situation that’s easy to get into in bash or zsh:

1. Run a command (it fails)
2. Update your PATH
3. Run bash to reload your config
4. Press the up arrow a couple of times to rerun the failed command (or open a new terminal)
5. The failed command isn’t in your history! Why not?

This happens because in bash, by default, history is not saved until you exit the shell.

Some options for fixing this:

• Instead of running bash to reload your config, run source ~/.bashrc (or source ~/.zshrc in zsh). This will reload the config inside your current session.
• Configure your shell to continuously save your history instead of only saving the history when the shell exits. (How to do this depends on whether you’re using bash or zsh, the history options in zsh are a bit complicated and I’m not exactly sure what the best way is)

a note on source

When you install cargo (Rust’s installer) for the first time, it gives you these instructions for how to set up your PATH, which don’t mention a specific directory at all.

This is usually done by running one of the following (note the leading DOT):

. "$HOME/.cargo/env"        	# For sh/bash/zsh/ash/dash/pdksh
source "$HOME/.cargo/env.fish"  # For fish

The idea is that you add that line to your shell’s config, and their script automatically sets up your PATH (and potentially other things) for you.

This is pretty common (for example Homebrew suggests you eval brew shellenv), and there are two ways to approach this:

1. Just do what the tool suggests (like adding . "$HOME/.cargo/env" to your shell’s config)
2. Figure out which directories the script they’re telling you to run would add to your PATH, and then add those manually. Here’s how I’d do that:
   • Run . "$HOME/.cargo/env" in my shell (or the fish version if using fish)
   • Run echo "$PATH" | tr ':' '\n' | grep cargo to figure out which directories it added
   • See that it says /Users/bork/.cargo/bin and shorten that to ~/.cargo/bin
   • Add the directory ~/.cargo/bin to PATH (with the directions in this post)

I don’t think there’s anything wrong with doing what the tool suggests (it might be the “best way”!), but personally I usually use the second approach because I prefer knowing exactly what configuration I’m changing.

a note on fish_add_path

fish has a handy function called fish_add_path that you can run to add a directory to your PATH like this:

fish_add_path /some/directory

This is cool (it’s such a simple command!) but I’ve stopped using it for a couple of reasons:

1. Sometimes fish_add_path will update the PATH for every session in the future (with a “universal variable”) and sometimes it will update the PATH just for the current session and it’s hard for me to tell which one it will do. In theory the docs explain this but I could not understand them.
2. If you ever need to remove the directory from your PATH a few weeks or months later because maybe you made a mistake, it’s kind of hard to do (there are instructions in this comments of this github issue though).

that’s all

Hopefully this will help some people. Let me know (on Mastodon or Bluesky) if you there are other major gotchas that have tripped you up when adding a directory to your PATH, or if you have questions about this post!

Gene Hackman has passed.

Gene Hackman, who never fit the mold of a Hollywood movie star, but who became one all the same, playing seemingly ordinary characters with deceptive subtlety, intensity and often charm in some of the most noted films of the 1970s and ’80s, has died, the authorities in New Mexico said on Thursday. He was 95.

Mr. Hackman and his wife were found dead on Wednesday afternoon at a home in Santa Fe., N.M., where they had been living, according to a statement from the Santa Fe County Sheriff’s Department. Sheriff’s deputies found the bodies of Mr. Hackman; his wife, Betsy Arakawa, 64; and a dog, according to the statement, which said that foul play was not suspected.

Ok. So, there are circumstances.

Hackman is, I think, my favorite actor of the 70s generation, which obviously is an extremely tough crowd to get ahead in. I listen to Smartless religiously, especially the eps that interview actors, and it’s fascinating to listen to how people in the business now have a combination of fear and reverence for that generation. Hackman carried an easy combination of wisdom and menace, which he could leverage from role to role. My favorites list is tough, but in no order:

1. The Conversation
2. Royal Tenenbaums
3. French Connection
4. Unforgiven
5. Get Shorty
6. The Quick and the Dead
7. The Firm
8. No Way Out
9. Superman I & II
10. Night Moves

I appreciate that’s an awfully idiosyncratic list but he had an idiosyncratic career.

Some clips:

Photo credit: By Christopher Michael Little, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=10689828

The post Hackman appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.

American Architect & Building News, August 3, 1883 (copyright expired)

Complex Queen Anne-style upper panes included stained glass inserts.  American Architect & Building News, December 22, 1888 (copyright expired)

A typical floorplan, with two apartments per floor--left and right.  The American Architect and Building News, January 17, 1891 (copyright expired)

Carl Pfeiffer's Queen Anne design carried into the interior, as well.  American Architect & Building News, August 4, 1883 (copyright expired)

William Marsh Rice, from the collection of Rice University

American Architect & Building News published this depiction of a Berkshire parlor in August 4, 1833 (copyright expired)

image via the NYC Dept of Records & Information Services.

Never, does the cook "take a day off"...Never, does Basil, the butler, decide to locate in Chicago to be near his aunt...Never is it necessary to dismiss Marie for impertinence...Never, in fact, do any of those things that heckle and non-plus householders occur...An Arcadian town-house--The Berkshire.

So it’s all fine and good to have this protest action, but I have a question.

Why is it that protest actions these days almost always advertise themselves as nonviolent?

Let’s be clear, I am most certainly not advocating for violence, which would almost certainly be stupid and counterproductive. I am however curious as to the process by which we fetishize nonviolence to the point that we have to define any political action as nonviolent upfront. Even leaving behind the fact that Martin Luther King was a gun owner and that guns were central to self-defense in the civil rights movement, it’s still kind of weird despite the bad history behind it. I am trying to wrap my brain around this.

It’s almost as if protestors today want to advertise that they will do nothing to threaten the system. It’s not as if, unless you live in Portland or Seattle, there are organized groups of anarchists who want to break shit that you have to worry much about in these protests. It just seems to me, again, to be announcement that we aren’t threatening in any way, shape, or form, that we will hold our little action and go home (probably using public transportation) and we can be ignored.

So I’m curious–why do we do this today?

The post The Nonviolence Fetish appeared first on Lawyers, Guns & Money.