4 ms·

It is not implied that using Haskell is the only way to find deep problems. The other way around is that shops using a language like Haskell are likely also inv

It is not implied that using Haskell is the only way to find deep problems. The other way around is that shops using a language like Haskell are likely also invested to thinking deeply about problems. So the causality is the other way around. The recommendation to look for Haskell shops is exactly a heuristic for the thing you recommend: > "work at a place that has problems that are deep enough to warrant deep dives." There are many ways to find such places. Filtering by tech stack is one possible way of many to search for signal.

almostgotcaught 2y ago
> So the causality is the other way around. Yes and I'm arguing there's exactly zero causal relationship. > There are many ways to find such places. Filtering by tech stack is one possible way of many to search for signal. You're just wrong. Deep problems come with scale and also cost money to solve. Small-medium shops have neither no matter the "tech stack".
- lemonwaterlime 2y ago
  I've seen small shops doing, for instance, deep tech work in physics. Their problem is big and their team is small. Some questions for you: Would you say every programming language is fungible? If so, then why are there so many? How many should there be?
  - almostgotcaught 2y ago
    > deep tech work in physics And how long did they have funding for to continue doing this work? Is there some part of "it's expensive to do deep work" that you disagree with? > Would you say every programming language is fungible? If so, then why are there so many? How many should there be? This is a complete non-sequitur.
    - lemonwaterlime 2y ago
      If I want to do numerical computing (to solve a problem that needs it), which languages should I consider? Which should I not? Is any language appropriate? Which languages do you reach for most often (whatever the reason for doing so)?
      - almostgotcaught 2y ago
        I still have no clue what you're getting at but the answer is 100% determined by the community you're a part of - the same PDE can be solved by different communities using Fortran/C++/Matlab/Julia/Python. You're conveniently not addressing the more salient, central point: deep work costs lots of money. Edit: but no one is solving PDEs using Haskell lol.
        lemonwaterlime 2y ago
        My point actually is that different languages suit different purposes with no statement about the cost to fund anything. While there may be many different paths to achieving a result—in this case numerical computing with any of "Fortran/C++/Matlab/Julia/Python"—certain languages are more suited to certain problem domains than others. You, yourself, stated the most popular languages for numerical computing. Most of those would not be suitable for general web development. Thus languages are neither fungible nor does it seem from the languages you just mentioned (which most would say the same) that there is "zero causal relationship" between a language and solving problems in the domain of interest. In this particular hypothetical, someone would notice a desire to solve deep problems with lots of funding that use numerical computing and could thus look for the languages you mentioned as an initial filter. Such a person would probably not be looking at a javascript role, for instance, given these aims. Thank you.
        almostgotcaught 2y ago
        > nor does it seem from the languages you just mentioned Lololol what exactly are the unifying themes of Fortran, C++, Matlab, Julia, Python They're all pairwise as different as can be. Man it's hilarious how delusional some people are to insist on their flawed point despite the loudest clearest contradictions.

almostgotcaught 2y ago

> So the causality is the other way around. Yes and I'm arguing there's exactly zero causal relationship. > There are many ways to find such places. Filtering by tech stack is one possible way of many to search for signal. You're just wrong. Deep problems come with scale and also cost money to solve. Small-medium shops have neither no matter the "tech stack".

lemonwaterlime 2y ago
I've seen small shops doing, for instance, deep tech work in physics. Their problem is big and their team is small. Some questions for you: Would you say every programming language is fungible? If so, then why are there so many? How many should there be?
- almostgotcaught 2y ago
  > deep tech work in physics And how long did they have funding for to continue doing this work? Is there some part of "it's expensive to do deep work" that you disagree with? > Would you say every programming language is fungible? If so, then why are there so many? How many should there be? This is a complete non-sequitur.
  - lemonwaterlime 2y ago
    If I want to do numerical computing (to solve a problem that needs it), which languages should I consider? Which should I not? Is any language appropriate? Which languages do you reach for most often (whatever the reason for doing so)?
    - almostgotcaught 2y ago
      I still have no clue what you're getting at but the answer is 100% determined by the community you're a part of - the same PDE can be solved by different communities using Fortran/C++/Matlab/Julia/Python. You're conveniently not addressing the more salient, central point: deep work costs lots of money. Edit: but no one is solving PDEs using Haskell lol.
      - lemonwaterlime 2y ago
        My point actually is that different languages suit different purposes with no statement about the cost to fund anything. While there may be many different paths to achieving a result—in this case numerical computing with any of "Fortran/C++/Matlab/Julia/Python"—certain languages are more suited to certain problem domains than others. You, yourself, stated the most popular languages for numerical computing. Most of those would not be suitable for general web development. Thus languages are neither fungible nor does it seem from the languages you just mentioned (which most would say the same) that there is "zero causal relationship" between a language and solving problems in the domain of interest. In this particular hypothetical, someone would notice a desire to solve deep problems with lots of funding that use numerical computing and could thus look for the languages you mentioned as an initial filter. Such a person would probably not be looking at a javascript role, for instance, given these aims. Thank you.
        almostgotcaught 2y ago
        > nor does it seem from the languages you just mentioned Lololol what exactly are the unifying themes of Fortran, C++, Matlab, Julia, Python They're all pairwise as different as can be. Man it's hilarious how delusional some people are to insist on their flawed point despite the loudest clearest contradictions.