4 ms·
The brevity and grandiosity is not for marketing the idea, it is so the idea can be attacked. I don't want to waste my working hours building a factory out of t
by breck 2y ago
The brevity and grandiosity is not for marketing the idea, it is so the idea can be attacked. I don't want to waste my working hours building a factory out of the wrong materials. If I've made a mistake, I want to know.
If the idea is truly good, the products built on the idea should do just fine.
- samatman 2y agoIt's your project to run as you please, of course. My guess is that the attacks you draw will skip any basis in technical merit and land directly on the tone, proceeding on an emotional basis. We have an n=1 here with plenty of that behavior on display. You'd like to believe that someone proposing Tree Notation for a project wouldn't be dismissed with "isn't that, like, the YAML for TimeCube guy?". But this is, in large part, how the world actually functions.
- breck 2y agoIt's been a slog, but I'm very happy with how the ideas in Scroll (which for all intents and purposes Tree Notation and Grammar are Scroll--99% of usage is Scroll) and PLDB have evolved. I don't mind the pushback. If it wasn't for the pushback against Tree Notation, I never would have started PLDB. ("Learn to research properly", one commenter once said. And he was right. I think PLDB is the proper way to do research). It's much nicer to get pushback than crickets. That means people are generously giving their time to consider the ideas. Crickets is the worst. I should know, I mostly get crickets.