stoicShell

12 ms·

31.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Here's what most surprised me recently, which compounds all your points. Middle of Nowhere, France, 11 AM. My Uber arrives, a cool Model 3, "huh, great!" I thought, "I'm gonna pry this guy's brain for info on E
32.
by stoicShell 7y ago
> statistically unlikely to pay off > probabilities involved with your decision While this is a good general approach to life IMHO as well — if you mean "be rational, not just emotional" and "work on your cognitive bias
33.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Microsoft's board sure pulled off a winning strike with Nadella. From "almost IBM-dinosaur" to biggest market cap on Earth pretty much tied with Apple, and massively reversing public image from hated to just about liked by ma
34.
by stoicShell 7y ago
I think we agree on the general perspective, yes — we'd probably agree as a team with known (ad hoc) conditions and goals. Data on small businesses is hard indeed. I'm only speaking anecdotally from the MSP / software shops p
35.
by stoicShell 7y ago
That will make for some pretty salient readings, thanks for the links. There are obviously cases of failure. I don't know the stats. I'm speaking mostly of small/medium businesses, where size and complexity are different.
36.
by stoicShell 7y ago
On a personal level, I have the same problems with using Python. I've become enamored with package management in Go — not perfect yet but efficient, simple, to the point. The backwards compatibility enforced at the version level is als
37.
by stoicShell 7y ago
The saying only applies when your product is software itself, not in most cases where software is just the means to deliver your product — here a website providing education in video form etc. Besides, the reality is that most business soft
38.
by stoicShell 7y ago
100% agreed, and you made me realize something. As someone who writes — I mean prose, whether fiction or not (mostly not: essays, technical, etc) — I had to come to terms quite early with the dichotomy you explain here. There is a place for
39.
by stoicShell 7y ago
As I read it: > “Typescript is a hack on top of [a] [supposedly] server side language that is [awful]. ( Node doesn't even support int64 )” "supposedly" in this context meaning Js is not worth being called a "se
40.
by stoicShell 7y ago
You might just have named the concept upon which Monica bases. - meta: it's interesting because having a word somehow 'creates' a concept in our minds, easier to think of and discuss I guess. - topic: the concept is truly int
41.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Got it, thanks. It's very true that common acronyms tend to get a life of their own, become words in and of themselves, even re-write their meaning — as poster below astutely suggested 'CRM' could mean "contacts"
42.
by stoicShell 7y ago
As a non-native English speaker I'm quite surprised at the use of the word "CRM" for “children of all your friends // your brother // your grand mother” Customers, seriously? Can someone educate me on this
43.
by stoicShell 7y ago
This needs to be said enough. On the other hand, remembering poems in school wasn't considered "easy" either, so I wonder why people think memory should easy for names, nor why it's a judgment on them that my memory i
44.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Agreed, Rust's "popularity" in production projects is a topic to be revisited circa 2025-2030. My personal intuition is that it will have become a strong alternative to C++ by then, and Go will probably eat the other side of
45.
by stoicShell 7y ago
I'm not sure what you're talking about. I suppose we have different backgrounds. - I've never heard a single ranking officer in the army or intelligence circle or the judiciary branch ever claim that "it's not clear
46.
by stoicShell 7y ago
I can't speak for America directly but I hear it's trending too: here in the old western world (EU), we gladly install cameras and microphones in our homes, down to the bedroom, all by ourselves. To think that 50 years from now, p
47.
by stoicShell 7y ago
The limit is that you have actual secrets to protect, whether codes or names. You don't want these public because everyone could destroy you then. Secrets are a necessary evil. Managing secrecy as a function of some more or less indepe
48.
by stoicShell 7y ago
I must not have made my idea clear. The thought experiment is not about software, nor is it about programmers. It's about writing e.g. "JohnSmith" on your freaking passport in the name field. It's about people being free
49.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Mmmh, OK, I see, thanks a lot for explaining. The UX you describe seems to fall in the 'naughty websites' category in my book, indeed. I think there's a "uncanny valley" of atrocious UX where it's "almost
50.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Allow me to reply, I think you've misunderstood parent's point: - there is a spectrum of "importance" to software: a shopping app crashing is generally less critical than medical software crashing during surgery. - there
51.
by stoicShell 7y ago
> efficiency for the sake of efficiency Oh dear rurp, you don't want to get me started on that! ;-) Your hiking example is a textbook page of my life, I do things like that all the time. Partner openly jokes that I'm crazy &#x2
52.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Sorry, I edited the post with more examples. Capitalized letters names in the middle, e.g. "JohnESmith" for "John E. Smith"? Note that owners would choose their array, i.e. how they wish to normalize their own name(s). I
53.
by stoicShell 7y ago
As a programmer and nerd with an aesthetic sense for consistency, I move that we all adopt an array of PascalCase strings as value for the "name" key. {"name": ["JohnSmith", "JohnEdwardSmith", &
54.
by stoicShell 7y ago
That was my thought as well. I went to Akihabara in 1997 and it was still glorious. Evidently that spirit has now moved to Shenzhen.
55.
by stoicShell 7y ago
> We have begun reaching out to external auditors and, in tandem, are opening up our operations to review by our users. This allows you to verify with your own eyes, whenever you want. WYSIWYG. Technical side: color me very curious abou
56.
by stoicShell 7y ago
Google sure is nowhere near as capable or even willing as Microsoft or Amazon; heck even IBM through Red Hat could prove a much better steward for its enterprise customers. But I think the morality is to never put all your eggs in the same
57.
by stoicShell 7y ago
You make great points and I agree with your take on agile — I actually mentioned "cost" to indicate that reality was deviating from the 'ideal' agile approach, when it stops being "the right thing to do" — bugg
58.
by stoicShell 7y ago
I think you need to become more independent from the 'system' you describe; i.e. go freelance / contractor / consultant / remote etc., some variation of these. I think I really don't trust the author of Rich da
59.
by stoicShell 7y ago
> This all presupposes the employees aren't inherently lazy. But, that's been my experience - "lazy" developers aren't generally lazy, just bored. In fact, afaik, it's kinda 'proven' loosely in
60.
by stoicShell 7y ago
First thing would be to de-correlate this 'news blockchain' entirely from any sort of 'coin', 'token', whatever 'currency' thing — a blockchain is a distributed database, period, 'crypto-coins&#x

More ›