wellpast

63 ms·

601.
by wellpast 11y ago
> There is a bias here: the ideas presented in popular science books are more likely to be disproven, just because they are more likely to warrant further study. If you're a researcher are you going to pursue Malcolm Gladwell's
602.
by wellpast 11y ago
I think a better world would be one in which TED talks were nuanced and full of maybes and the audience loved the lack of certainty, saw it as opportunity, and many of them were even prompted to labor and take their part in resolving those
603.
by wellpast 11y ago
OP isn't arguing for "nothing". She is just giving fair warning.
604.
by wellpast 12y ago
You seem angry. Maybe David Krakauer is changing your basis set too much.
605.
by wellpast 12y ago
His Hamlet analogy doesn't work for me. Couldn't I change Hamlet's name every other line of his dialogue (this making < 1% changes to the original) and yet by doing tihs drastically change the qualities of the work.
606.
by wellpast 12y ago
Beautiful code looks like a directed, acyclic graph -- a tree with small nodes (high cohesion) and minimal dependencies (low coupling). Narrow interfaces are the last piece, but I'm not sure how you visualize that -- perhaps with the w
607.
by wellpast 12y ago
I've been using Session Buddy [1] to "lasso" a set of my open tabs for later use. A little bit more love to that UX and it'd be bliss. I worry about Tabvention automatically closing my tabs. [1] https://chrome
608.
by wellpast 12y ago
Nordic Naturals Ultimate Omega. My eye doctor was specific on this brand--emphasizing the EPA and DHA levels.
609.
by wellpast 12y ago
I use fish oil for dry and red eyes and I also notice a big difference. Seem to notice, I suppose...
610.
Airbnb's April Fools Joke Is Confusing(blog.airbnb.com)
4 points by wellpast 12y ago|0 comments
611.
by wellpast 12y ago
(1) As long as your goal is to aggressively learn and grow and understand, then your dignity is certifiable. (I'll even print you out a certificate if you ask!) So act as one aggressively interested in learning. If these guys are reall
612.
by wellpast 12y ago
> What's in it for me? Expressiveness. I appreciate the author's wanting a more explicit and practical answer to this question, but I don't think his answer here ("expressiveness") does any better job than the ot
613.
Flaubert, Discipline, and Originality(theilluminationdilemma.com)
3 points by wellpast 12y ago|0 comments
614.
by wellpast 12y ago
> if you rigorously separate view from logic from database, you make it harder to add features that must touch all three I've found the exact opposite of this to be true.
615.
by wellpast 12y ago
All good points. However... 1. Declarative expressions are much easier to spot for defects (and much easier to not introduce defects). So do you want easier interaction w/ your debugger or do you want less bugs? 2. "There is no wa
616.
by wellpast 12y ago
You've probably heard it as ones that lead to low-coupling and high-cohesion, which is correct. But in my experience this needs to be made more concrete -- many people can say these words, but couldn't tell you accurately to what
617.
by wellpast 12y ago
Good point. How many "rockstar" developers show up at Company X, build the initial versions of a product or architecture, then move on to the next company never to understand the longer term consequences of their choices?
618.
by wellpast 12y ago
100% agree. Though a lot of the churn here could be reduced with the right education and mentorship. There is a mathematics to good architectures -- a mathematics that can be taught. But currently the initiative of us are left to find the w
619.
by wellpast 12y ago
Today, yes. But that's a problem our industry needs to solve. A lot of our labor force has already paid in money and time for education. Our education system has simply failed to deliver the full skill sets. Not necessarily the educati
620.
by wellpast 12y ago
"Well considered" is too subjective, I think. There are specific , concrete skill sets that lead to systems with specific , well-defined properties (i.e., architectural soundness). Your system may be well-considered but if i
621.
by wellpast 12y ago
This is important: you can separate handling complexity from the profession of building architecturally sound systems. We can teach people how to do math correctly. That doesn't guarantee that they will be able to solve arbitrarily com
622.
by wellpast 12y ago
Yep -- and I argue that the craftsman can finish at least as fast as the shop student. When someone says "I don't have time to make it sound", they're really saying "I don't have the skills." By the way, I
623.
by wellpast 12y ago
I'm not saying that it doesn't take time to build software and I'm not making a case for how to do management. In my decade of experience on different teams and products, the main impedance to productivity has by far been t
624.
by wellpast 12y ago
I largely agree w/ the argument here, but "slow" is going to be self-defeating nomenclature, and is also inaccurate. Business doesn't want slow. So if we're pitching slow, we're setting ourselves up to lose and
625.
by wellpast 12y ago
For development speed and code maintenance, this is ideal. Your team only needs to master one language and its set of tools and libraries. You are pinioned by this choice on some practical levels. Mainly, some users and use cases demand the
626.
by wellpast 12y ago
So what specifically about OO gets so much better as soon as you take types away? Can you give a specific improvement?
627.
by wellpast 12y ago
I wish you hadn't asked this question b/c it sent me on a wild goose chase, mainly as I tried to reconcile my understanding of OOP vs. Kay's version of it, of which I'm still unclear. I perused the [1] he mentions to try
628.
by wellpast 12y ago
I've worked on teams that emphasize commit logs as a place to keep significant information about the code. This inevitably coincides with a "minimize change deltas" mentality to development because else the commit history get
629.
by wellpast 12y ago
I copied the quote from [1] however credible you find that source. (Though they provide references to several books at the end of their article.) Also, Darwin: "At no time am I a quick thinker or writer: whatever I have done in science
630.
by wellpast 12y ago
Einstein fit that bill, as well. Scientists that worked with him noted he was neither a fast thinker nor the best of mathematicians.

More ›