Over ear wireless headphone recommendations for many hours of coding?
17 points • 40 comments
Recent @travisgriggs Activity
Over ear wireless headphone recommendations for many hours of coding?
17 points • 40 comments
Back to the Future, Dan Ingalls and others [http://ftp.squeak.org/docs/OOPSLA.Squeak.html]
Homesteading the Noosphere, Eric Raymond [http://catb.org/~esr/writings/homesteading/homesteading/]
Great points. I know I've experience miscommunication going both ways with this.
The problem is that history does not repeat itself. It rhymes with itself. This means that "do it the way we did it" won't work. And is frustrating for younger generations. But it also means it's stupid to ignore the rhymes and ignore near and present and easily lectured history available. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater kind of thing.
It's hard to navigate this. A great example of this (to me) is the "getting a job" thing. The boomer advice would be that you "pound the pavement", "call back", etc. Younger people are frustrated with how out of touch this is, because even if they're willing to try, human resources and other forms of automation have rendered this just about pointless. And yet... the value of networking is stronger than ever. The better advice from the boomer would be to realize that the "technique" they used was about networking with and impressing potential employers, admit that those techniques are no longer relevant, but that the value of networking into an organization still has a lot of influence on whether you're going to work there or not.
This is of course generalized, and prone to a litany of counter exceptions. Because all of these "make life better" are rarely absolute, but more stochastic in nature.
> It's very hard for a 55 year old manager of a small town bank to understand his daughter literally will not have the same opportunities he had as globalization eats all of the small town opportunities.
I am 50. I make good money as a software developer in an agrarian community of 50,000. I have 4 children with one left at home.
It IS (and has been) very clear to me that my children are having a harder time enjoying the same opportunities I have. Which makes me profoundly sad and frustrated. The comforts and excess I do enjoy, can't offset that, as much as I am willing to try.
So I'm not sure what the conclusion you're reaching here is? Are you saying that bank managers (and other moderately successful/wealthy people) are inherently self absorbed?
You used public benefits and commercialization in the same paragraph.
While that kind of semi symbiotic relationship can (and has been observed to) exist, it does so best in an an environment that looks different than what is described here (few large near monopolies, legislative regulations that are best navigated using wealth, a market that has inelastic bargaining qualities).
I personally wholeheartedly agree with this article. It is True Doctrine. For me at least.
BUT... these last few years, I have come to some uncomfortable realizations. Not all software developers/engineers are indeed like what this article describes. It took me a while to understand it, but I came to realize that really investing yourself into what you're developing means taking on additional risk. To have successful insights that transcend those basic market driven requirements, you're also going to hit some foul balls. To push yourself to learn new things, to ask questions, creates risk for ego. The personalities that do not conform to what the article describes, are the first to advocate "leadership, direction, single point of contact", etc. I've realized they are sometimes codeword for "offload risk." An interesting symbiosis occurs between developers and non-developers: the doers and the deciders. Because the risk is now floating somewhere between a sort of dissociated yen and yang, both groups can comfortably offload blame/risk on the other group. Everyone wins. Except for the customers and the product. Even if it threatens the long term longevity/viability of the product, the short term optimization of comfort wins out.
When I read articles like this, where the solutions proposed are to make it more efficient (legally, operationally, fiscally) for more people to live in smaller places, I'm curious how that resolves with others' sense of the desire for privacy.
I realize the privacy conversation here usually revolves around ad tech, but for me at least, it's more general than that. And I find that the denser the population, no matter how optimal it is, creates more constraints for me as a human being.
There's a sweet spot in the human equation for me, when I am the most liberty to enjoy self determination and free well, but also rub shoulders socially with enough of the rest of mankind that I enjoy the magnification that happens when we work together.
So I applaud efforts to get people in equitable homes--I have a married daughter who takes care of my wonderful wonderful 20mo grand twins, and I fear and angst for their future housing prospects in this country--but if they're just cages for rent in the end, did we really get the real prize?
Did anyone else go read the article to see actual train bridges? Like the kind the train drives across? Especially titillated because train bridges have been pretty train bridgey for the last +150 years and the promise of something new was exciting?
I feel dumb. And had.
What could possibly go wrong?
Will we see the dawn of a shadow industry of "reliable sourcing" providers?
I just didn't see his name in the "people" section. Didn't know if he was doing other things these days.
Curious where Eliot Miranda is relative to this project?
What Covid showed me was that nearly all of my friends were people I had friendly working relationships with. A ton of my friends were from church where we served in different capacities together and enjoyed working together. And I had a lot of similar relationships at work. But with stay at home covid, I found that I didn't yearn to see these people still. I'm glad when we do stuff together, we enjoy doing so. But I don't miss them. And I found there was a small handful of people that were worth making the effort to actually go on socially distanced walks or whatever to still just hang out.
I am never going back to that super busy over programmed life style where my friends are just the people it's best to get along with friends-like because you're together a lot.
My first not-quite-languages were Logo and then a smattering of autolisp (I didn't learn near enough to know much to do with it). First real programming that followed was Fortran, eventually on a Cray with threading extensions. And then a fork in the road leading to both C and Smalltalk-80 in parallel.
I don't feel like this specific heritage affected how I learned programming. But then, I was mostly self taught with a generous amount of solicited input from older engineers and contractors I worked with/around (looking back, I'm a bit self conscious and just how annoying young me probably was--I did try to load balance at least). So maybe this article doesn't resonate much with me because it comes from the realm of common computer science pedagogy.
In fact, my first "college programming classes" were a year or so later, two classes in C that all mechanical engineering students at BYU had to take. I was able to wow my peers by making a faster sieve of erastones than others. And then for the "chose your own project", I used Smalltalk 80 to model quantities with units and a symbolic algebraic equation modeler/evaluator including a graphic visuallier that could plot arbitrary equations like PV = nRT -- the TA marked off points because my code didn't include enough comments even though the next closest program was a Fortran piece that prompted for a few values and it then spit out the correctly interpolated u, h, or s values from the steam tables. Needless to say, my impression of computer science pedagogy in the early to mid 90s wasn't that great. My take away was not so much what language was first, but who I learned from first.
And ironically, earned 3 points of HN karma kreds for this very tiny contribution to the discussion. Oh the deep irony in this particular context of KPI spamming.
Came to the comments to learn what KPI was. And leaned about Goodharts law: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goodhart%27s_law
I wish they would call it something like QR45 then, not Base45.
Wow. Thanks for this link! This article is the real gem of this thread. Even if you just skimmed the original article, go read this one. It's the meat of the matter.
My only disappointment, is that Michael Young offers no solution in this particular treatise. Did he do so elsewhere?
So Putin was right, huh?
Spectator Sports: the act of deriving hope, happiness, failure, elation, frustration, and other emotions from the actions of others. See also: performing arts.
Competitive Sport: the act of determining your performance and subsequent identity/categorization by arbitrary comparison with other arbitrary individuals.
Here's an idea. Let's just let weightlifters lift weights. They can compare themselves to their previous efforts and broadcast their successes by beating their own PRs. If people want to find some sort of vicarious happiness from observing this process, set up (monetize) their efforts with something like Twitch.
For every thousand hacking at the leaves...
Just tax ad revenue. Really really tax it. Outlawing/prohibiting things in the west is too hard. But we're good at lobbying and taxing things.