gjm11

65 ms·

691.
by gjm11 4y ago
I did not say (and don't believe) that "the universe shall operate on the bicyclist's time and speed". You just made that up. Most of the time, when a car meets a bicycle, the car overtakes. The only question is what hap
692.
by gjm11 4y ago
I don't think I understand. Apparently it's unreasonable for one set of road users to say to another "When we're around, you have to go much more slowly on this road than you would like to". But it's not unreas
693.
by gjm11 4y ago
I wonder whether we are using the terms "rational" and "rationalism" in different ways. To me, "rationalism" means one of two things. When talking about the history of philosophy, it's the opposite of &quo
694.
by gjm11 4y ago
Do you think the Roman empire was notably rational, and that if Constantine hadn't converted to Christianity it would have been more rational than it was under Christianity? That seems highly not obvious to me, and I would be intereste
695.
by gjm11 4y ago
It is, to say the least, not obvious that Constantine's conversion to Christianity was the thing he did that had most impact on commerce in the Roman Empire. You did indeed mention "three aspects". But merely mentioning a
696.
by gjm11 4y ago
I said "seems" rather than just "is" mostly to be polite. In view of your response I am regretting that. I do not know what you mean by asking (I assume mostly rhetorically) "is that why they didn't 'menti
697.
by gjm11 4y ago
Yup. Max Howell, creator of Homebrew. A bit more information here https://www.quora.com/Whats-the-logic-behind-Google-rejectin... (link to Quora, uggh, but that's where he wrote it). HN discussion of that: https:&#x2F
698.
by gjm11 4y ago
A key premise of this comment -- that the "concerned.tech" open letter only complains about public blockchains (with the insinuation being that some of the people involved are only doing that because their own private-blockchain
699.
by gjm11 4y ago
Maybe the OP was edited in response to this, but right now it does link to exactly the same thing as you do. Search for "Let's see how yes does it".
700.
by gjm11 4y ago
Just try one or the other and see how it goes. If it doesn't work well for you but also doesn't completely put you off Shakespeare, try the other one. If neither works well for you but you still want more Shakespeare in your life,
701.
by gjm11 4y ago
Closely related (meaning: I think it might be exactly the same game): Antiwordle, https://www.antiwordle.com/ . [EDITED to add:] Not exactly the same; with Antiwordle the idea is just to last as long as you can, rather th
702.
by gjm11 4y ago
(It wasn't passive-aggressive, it was just aggressive.) The "I know I'm going to get downvoted for this, but ..." thing is annoyingly common, and unfortunately it's common for a reason: a lot of the time it works :
703.
by gjm11 4y ago
> I know I will get downvoted for saying this I doubt it, but I downvoted you for saying that . No comment anywhere has ever been improved by adding "I know I will get downvoted for saying this, but". Please don't do it.
704.
by gjm11 4y ago
It is true that code is read more than written, and I agree that code should be optimized more for easy understandability than for minimal characters typed. But in some cases leaving types to be inferred helps with understandability, beca
705.
by gjm11 4y ago
I think that if I were building a system that worked this way, automatically-inserted type declarations would be distinguished somehow (preferably in a way that in good text editors just appears as different formatting), and then when you c
706.
by gjm11 4y ago
Maybe I'm just naturally pretentious or something, but it doesn't read to me as anywhere near as pretentious as I would expect a Wikipedia article to be if that were true. Do you have some links or something to support what you
707.
by gjm11 4y ago
It depends on what you mean by "in your control". Obviously (1) you choose what to eat and (2) if you eat little enough then you will get thin, and if you eat enough then you will get fat. (But also: (a') you choose what to d
708.
by gjm11 4y ago
I was going to say: "I'm torn, because usually I have a policy of downvoting every HN comment I see that says 'I'm going to get downvoted for this', but this looks really interesting". But then I checked your l
709.
by gjm11 4y ago
(Tom) Knight says that fixing problems requires you to understand what's going on, and you can't just blindly turn a machine off and on again and hope it'll fix things. In the novice's particular case, Knight understands
710.
by gjm11 4y ago
I'm looking at the Smalltalk-72 manual right now and I see e.g. the following: > In Smalltalk, every entity is called an object; every object belongs to a class (which is also an object). Objects can remember things about themselve
711.
by gjm11 4y ago
Yeah, I did feel a little weird writing commentaries on Knuth's writing just like he was writing commentaries on Paul's. Fortunately no one thinks I am obliged to regard Knuth as perfectly free from error. (Speaking of not being p
712.
by gjm11 4y ago
So, Knuth wrote this rather unusual book called "3:16" in which he took every chapter-3-verse-16 in the Bible (where chapter 3 is too short for that, he continued past the end into chapter 4 in the obvious way), thought about it a
713.
by gjm11 4y ago
I tried the top several results (searching for "large-format laser printer" as per Adam Savage's rant). Most of the results contained no large-format laser printers and no useful advice on finding or choosing them. The most p
714.
by gjm11 4y ago
"Global cooling" was never an expert consensus, so far as I can tell. It was a thing some people thought might happen and would probably be bad, but the idea that in the 1970s everyone was confidently predicting that the climate w
715.
by gjm11 4y ago
Everything beyond the introductory matter is available only to subscribers to Taibbi's Substack -- who presumably have already been notified of this without needing to see it on HN.
716.
by gjm11 4y ago
That page neither argues that, nor supports the view that, "well-regulated" means well armed or well equipped. The page argues that it means something like "running well", but the examples they give seem to me to fit bet
717.
by gjm11 4y ago
sed delenda est? sed sed editor consuetus textorum est!
718.
by gjm11 4y ago
I think "does credit Casey (just not by name)" is an oxymoron. You aren't crediting someone unless you actually, y'know, give them the credit.
719.
by gjm11 4y ago
They also expect 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 == 1. Decimals won't help with that.
720.
by gjm11 5y ago
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding or missing something, but I'm afraid this seems completely wrongheaded to me. (My apologies for being so blunt, but right now your comment appears to be the most-upvoted, and I therefore think it nee

More ›