3 ms·

I disagree with you, but to really understand why you will need to read my book. It may sound like a lot of effort, but I can assure you that my disagreement is

I disagree with you, but to really understand why you will need to read my book. It may sound like a lot of effort, but I can assure you that my disagreement is as intricate as the celestial orbits, as deep as the darkest ocean, and as as divine as the heavens themselves. The scholars and holy men have spent years studying why I disagree with you, and they will confirm that, once you too have spent years studying, you will not only disagree with your former self, but understand, with the first true clarity of your adult life, that the sacred knowledge cannot be grasped by the clumsy hands of a dilettante. "Please, sir", I hear you ask, "can you not spare some crumb of wisdom from the table of your enlightenment? Some small morsel to nourish me on my journey?" I am afraid not. Summaries are nothing but fornications of the mind: easy pleasures to tempt you away from the righteous path of long and laborious study to an uncertain end. The truly wise know that it is better to know nothing than to know a little. And if, in some fit of insouciance, you begin to think it is not worth your time to engage with the entire depth (as the ocean, recall) of my argument before knowing if it is true, or useful, or relevant to you? Then I can offer nothing but pity. Do you not understand that it is you who must prove yourself worthy of my ideas? You who must justify your relevance to me? The ego of students these days is astonishing. It's no wonder they never learn anything.

KirinDave 8y ago
I like to imagine a hypothetical, parallel universe where you spent the same amount of time writing your overwrought post and instead focused on the first paragraph of the simple, accessible webpage that is linked, you'd see a link directly to a series of interactive code samples. An exact summary of "what it's good for" is found in the second paragraph (as noted by others in this thread). Such an investment of time would surely get you below the fold, and see the link to multiple talks and papers. There's a whole section just entitled, "Recorded Talks" with dozens of videos offered by professionals far more qualified to talk on the subject than either you or I as implementors of such software systems laid out in an archival format. Talks by such amazing people as Byrd, Freidman, Stokke or Nolan. I like to think in that same universe, the poster I responded to also took this time. So that I could have instead spent more time on my OTHER, way more fun and interesting post where I go into a use case. Maybe actually reformatted some source code from the prototype I'm contractually forbidden to share to give a more in-depth look in how one might use these principles (which are, as I suggested, not at all obvious) in industry applications. I think that alternate universe is one I'd like to live in. Instead, I'm stuck here in this one. A universe where instead of doing more cool posts about the electromechanics of power tools and their restoration, you instead write a prickly little post defending someone's request for a thing that was literally offered in the first paragraph of the source page they asked about. One where I spend time writing this boring post as well. Truly, we live in the darkest timeline. Probably the darkest part about this timeline is that my post you responded to, devoid of novelty and missing the talk link I was going to copypaste leaving a blank footnote annotation? That's gotten over 3x the positive moderation of my other post where I describe an active use case. But thanks for your feedback. You're right, I shouldn't post here anymore.

KirinDave 8y ago

I like to imagine a hypothetical, parallel universe where you spent the same amount of time writing your overwrought post and instead focused on the first paragraph of the simple, accessible webpage that is linked, you'd see a link directly to a series of interactive code samples. An exact summary of "what it's good for" is found in the second paragraph (as noted by others in this thread). Such an investment of time would surely get you below the fold, and see the link to multiple talks and papers. There's a whole section just entitled, "Recorded Talks" with dozens of videos offered by professionals far more qualified to talk on the subject than either you or I as implementors of such software systems laid out in an archival format. Talks by such amazing people as Byrd, Freidman, Stokke or Nolan. I like to think in that same universe, the poster I responded to also took this time. So that I could have instead spent more time on my OTHER, way more fun and interesting post where I go into a use case. Maybe actually reformatted some source code from the prototype I'm contractually forbidden to share to give a more in-depth look in how one might use these principles (which are, as I suggested, not at all obvious) in industry applications. I think that alternate universe is one I'd like to live in. Instead, I'm stuck here in this one. A universe where instead of doing more cool posts about the electromechanics of power tools and their restoration, you instead write a prickly little post defending someone's request for a thing that was literally offered in the first paragraph of the source page they asked about. One where I spend time writing this boring post as well. Truly, we live in the darkest timeline. Probably the darkest part about this timeline is that my post you responded to, devoid of novelty and missing the talk link I was going to copypaste leaving a blank footnote annotation? That's gotten over 3x the positive moderation of my other post where I describe an active use case. But thanks for your feedback. You're right, I shouldn't post here anymore.