4 ms·
I disagree with the author. I know he's incredibly successful and right about pretty much everything he's ever said, but I've had some experience in this area a
by DoubleDerper 4y ago
I disagree with the author. I know he's incredibly successful and right about pretty much everything he's ever said, but I've had some experience in this area and just finished reading through some of the archives and I think his focus is wrong. I'm going to ignore the technical issue and talk about the bigger picture and higher level things than what was said in the blog post. If the OP thinks that the process is most important, it's really about end results. But if he thinks it should be about the end results then he's an idiot for not thinking about the process. I'll weasel in a reference the startup I co-founded even though it's not directly relevant.
- poulpy123 4y agoNo, OP is correct. * You omitted hist point X. * You misunderstand point Y. * Here's point Z you didn't account for.
- goosedragons 4y agoContinuing the discussion of point Z, here's an interesting way[1] it relates back to the OP. And here are some unknown facts[2] the OP didn't include. [1]: http://SomeScientificJournal.com/141421 http://SomeScientificJournal.com/141421 [2]: http://SomeNewsSite.com/11235813 http://SomeNewsSite.com/11235813
- JumpCrisscross 4y agoCuriously, while examples of metacoentary stretch back to antiquity, the concept having a name is modern [1]. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-reference#History-of-the-concept-and-the-term https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meta-reference#History-of-th...
- Justin_K 4y agoThis.
- MichaelZuo 4y agoWell the OP could be both correct and incorrect.
- mv9 4y ago> tangential statement I'm honestly really curious about this. Could you elaborate?
- briandear 4y agoBut considering climate change, having people sized sidewalks and taxing the externalities of the process is really the point you failed to consider. Nuclear might work but there is a lot more to it that doesn’t get addressed in the article. Estonia really gets this correct and proves the point that the American city isn’t going to be well designed if we don’t consider the impact of the rail system and electrification.