8 ms·

Oh my God. I've become this guy. I simply do not give a shit about whatever the latest opinionated framework/tech of the week is. All I've gotten to is the poi

Oh my God. I've become this guy. I simply do not give a shit about whatever the latest opinionated framework/tech of the week is. All I've gotten to is the point where what I really care about is "Can I fit all the necessary bits and bobs in my head?" The rest is just branding, mind share, and the cult of complexity. Example: Yarn I finally figured out why I hate it. It tries to "help" you optimize your runtime namespace via hoisting. Causing higher level builds to create a distinctly different runtime footprint via hoisting than running each of the lower level builds individually. What. The. Heck. Who wants to inflict that on a user? I don't use a computer to do things in ways where I have to go through the torment of cataloging every bad assumption at every level. I'll take more pessimum, but easier track the reality of over more optimum, yet opaque any day.

WorldPeas 5y ago
same here. if only someone would create a computer from the bottom up rather than accept our current state of immense hubris
- ironmagma 5y ago
  The problem there is that reinventing decades-old technology while believing one can simply shrug off uncounted millions of hours of technical problems and troubleshooting by doing so is in fact extreme hubris. Keeping the existing stack is much more humble.
  - selfhoster11 5y ago
    Ever since I read the Joel on Software article on rewriting [0], I tend to share this opinion. However, there comes a point where it's much better to shuck some or all the layer of the tech stack. It's inarguable that our current state of hardware and software is a festering pile of legacy layer upon legacy layer. C, x86 and Unix got us far and they were the only tech in their category that could do what they did, but the world has come a long way and they come with essential downsides (in both senses of the word). There will be replacements for each, eventually. C is finally meeting its match in Rust and certain other contenders, while x86 is sort-of under siege by ARM and RISC-V. It will take a while before it happens, but we will be better off as an industry. We will build back better, simply because we have the benefit of hindsight now. [0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-...
    - ironmagma 5y ago
      I agree the end result could very well be better. But, I’d also say it could very well be worse. As a result, it’s risky, and therefore ambitious rather than a humble thing to do.
      - selfhoster11 5y ago
        Perhaps, but we still have the old thing to fall back on for a little while if the new thing is really that bad. This will give it enough time to iron out the bugs. For example, Linux is in the middle of switching out the display server for something more modern, but not everyone has moved on because the new display server is still missing features and interoperability that the old one had. Everyone will eventually move on from the old one, but it's not like it's automatically overshadowed just because there's a new thing.
        ironmagma 5y ago
        I would say Wayland vs X11 is a great example of how a rewrite can go wrong. In theory, Wayland should be better because it's easier to reason about and more restricted, but in practice, X11 being "dumb" (anything goes) is probably what led to its mass adoption to begin with. This mismatch in expectations has led to a falloff of support in what would otherwise be a thriving open source project. Several of our general purpose platforms that have mass appeal (TTYs, the telephone systems, the Internet, FM radio, heck, even Fax) are built on unopinionated, stupid pipes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Wayland is very much not a dumb pipe. As a result, it's risky in my book.
- klyrs 5y ago
  It's hilarious that you use "hubris" to describe the old stuff which works but is long in the tooth. Are we actually going to reinvent all the wheels, completely destroy backwards compatibility, and come up with a computing platform that is a pleasure to use and develop for? And who's going to explain to grandma that it's better even if it won't run the bridge game she bought in 1996?
  - nineteen999 5y ago
    You're going to teach grandma how to install and use an emulator or virtual machine of course. She'll love that.
- salawat 5y ago
  What's the immense hubris? The reinventing the wheel constantly? I mean rebuilding from the bottom up would be an example of that hubris at work... So I feel like I'm not understanding what you were trying to convey.
- clownpenis_fart 5y ago
  what's stopping you?
saurik 5y ago
What we need to figure out how to do is to inoculate new developers against ever caring about the latest "opinionated framework/tech of the week" in the first place :(.
- beckman466 5y ago
  > What we need to figure out how to do is to inoculate new developers against ever caring about the latest "opinionated framework/tech of the week" Capital dictates what tech is popular, not actual popularity or effectiveness. So abolishing Silicon Valley and the global north IP regime is the only strategy that cuts at the root of this problem.
  - sudosysgen 5y ago
    Ultimately, yes, but good luck ending IP imperialism. It would force the global north to actually build what it's consuming instead of extracting rents from intellectual property. That won't happen.
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- danellis 5y ago
  Not making a thousand new "Top 10 Frameworks to Learn in 2021" videos every week would be a good start.
  - saurik 5y ago
    FWIW, I believe those people are often the very amateurs who are drinking the koolaid themselves (and when they aren't they are parasites that are more "fans" of software that developers).
    - runawaybottle 5y ago
      Well, let’s talk about that. These bloggers are taking part in a type of traffic generation that either generates direct revenue, or indirectly generates leads via branding (let’s say they get paid for their reputation). What actually keeps that business model going? They have to write newer and newer shit about newer and newer shit. That’s the whole game. Very few of them ever write mea culpas - ‘Hey I pimped something to you guys for awhile, and it turns out that tech really sucked’ or ‘Woah, I’m so sorry about espousing this pattern or framework, it’s not that great’. That destroys credibility. I don’t really think they are sincere, the same way the media broadcasted everything Trump did to make him popular, followed by broadcasting everything bad he did because he’s the wave they needed to ride. The insincerity is not even close to being bad in tech compared to politics, influencers, etc, but it’s there.
ironmagma 5y ago
FWIW, the new (2+) Yarn does not use hoisting, and you can disable it on Yarn v1 as well via nohoist: https://classic.yarnpkg.com/blog/2018/02/15/nohoist/ https://classic.yarnpkg.com/blog/2018/02/15/nohoist/
chadcmulligan 5y ago
The best software was written in the 90's - Delphi - everything else is still catching up. All web frameworks are awful, because the browser is awful. There, I said it.

WorldPeas 5y ago

same here. if only someone would create a computer from the bottom up rather than accept our current state of immense hubris

ironmagma 5y ago
The problem there is that reinventing decades-old technology while believing one can simply shrug off uncounted millions of hours of technical problems and troubleshooting by doing so is in fact extreme hubris. Keeping the existing stack is much more humble.
- selfhoster11 5y ago
  Ever since I read the Joel on Software article on rewriting [0], I tend to share this opinion. However, there comes a point where it's much better to shuck some or all the layer of the tech stack. It's inarguable that our current state of hardware and software is a festering pile of legacy layer upon legacy layer. C, x86 and Unix got us far and they were the only tech in their category that could do what they did, but the world has come a long way and they come with essential downsides (in both senses of the word). There will be replacements for each, eventually. C is finally meeting its match in Rust and certain other contenders, while x86 is sort-of under siege by ARM and RISC-V. It will take a while before it happens, but we will be better off as an industry. We will build back better, simply because we have the benefit of hindsight now. [0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-never-do-part-i/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/04/06/things-you-should-...
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    I agree the end result could very well be better. But, I’d also say it could very well be worse. As a result, it’s risky, and therefore ambitious rather than a humble thing to do.
    - selfhoster11 5y ago
      Perhaps, but we still have the old thing to fall back on for a little while if the new thing is really that bad. This will give it enough time to iron out the bugs. For example, Linux is in the middle of switching out the display server for something more modern, but not everyone has moved on because the new display server is still missing features and interoperability that the old one had. Everyone will eventually move on from the old one, but it's not like it's automatically overshadowed just because there's a new thing.
      - ironmagma 5y ago
        I would say Wayland vs X11 is a great example of how a rewrite can go wrong. In theory, Wayland should be better because it's easier to reason about and more restricted, but in practice, X11 being "dumb" (anything goes) is probably what led to its mass adoption to begin with. This mismatch in expectations has led to a falloff of support in what would otherwise be a thriving open source project. Several of our general purpose platforms that have mass appeal (TTYs, the telephone systems, the Internet, FM radio, heck, even Fax) are built on unopinionated, stupid pipes. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Wayland is very much not a dumb pipe. As a result, it's risky in my book.
klyrs 5y ago
It's hilarious that you use "hubris" to describe the old stuff which works but is long in the tooth. Are we actually going to reinvent all the wheels, completely destroy backwards compatibility, and come up with a computing platform that is a pleasure to use and develop for? And who's going to explain to grandma that it's better even if it won't run the bridge game she bought in 1996?
- nineteen999 5y ago
  You're going to teach grandma how to install and use an emulator or virtual machine of course. She'll love that.
salawat 5y ago
What's the immense hubris? The reinventing the wheel constantly? I mean rebuilding from the bottom up would be an example of that hubris at work... So I feel like I'm not understanding what you were trying to convey.
clownpenis_fart 5y ago
what's stopping you?

saurik 5y ago

What we need to figure out how to do is to inoculate new developers against ever caring about the latest "opinionated framework/tech of the week" in the first place :(.

beckman466 5y ago
> What we need to figure out how to do is to inoculate new developers against ever caring about the latest "opinionated framework/tech of the week" Capital dictates what tech is popular, not actual popularity or effectiveness. So abolishing Silicon Valley and the global north IP regime is the only strategy that cuts at the root of this problem.
- sudosysgen 5y ago
  Ultimately, yes, but good luck ending IP imperialism. It would force the global north to actually build what it's consuming instead of extracting rents from intellectual property. That won't happen.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
danellis 5y ago
Not making a thousand new "Top 10 Frameworks to Learn in 2021" videos every week would be a good start.
- saurik 5y ago
  FWIW, I believe those people are often the very amateurs who are drinking the koolaid themselves (and when they aren't they are parasites that are more "fans" of software that developers).
  - runawaybottle 5y ago
    Well, let’s talk about that. These bloggers are taking part in a type of traffic generation that either generates direct revenue, or indirectly generates leads via branding (let’s say they get paid for their reputation). What actually keeps that business model going? They have to write newer and newer shit about newer and newer shit. That’s the whole game. Very few of them ever write mea culpas - ‘Hey I pimped something to you guys for awhile, and it turns out that tech really sucked’ or ‘Woah, I’m so sorry about espousing this pattern or framework, it’s not that great’. That destroys credibility. I don’t really think they are sincere, the same way the media broadcasted everything Trump did to make him popular, followed by broadcasting everything bad he did because he’s the wave they needed to ride. The insincerity is not even close to being bad in tech compared to politics, influencers, etc, but it’s there.

ironmagma 5y ago

FWIW, the new (2+) Yarn does not use hoisting, and you can disable it on Yarn v1 as well via nohoist: https://classic.yarnpkg.com/blog/2018/02/15/nohoist/ https://classic.yarnpkg.com/blog/2018/02/15/nohoist/

chadcmulligan 5y ago

The best software was written in the 90's - Delphi - everything else is still catching up. All web frameworks are awful, because the browser is awful. There, I said it.