Quotes
paulgraham.com
paulgraham.com
(defvar scratch-quotes
(list
"Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth. - Mike Tyson"
"Look, I made a hat...where there never was a hat. - Finishing the hat, Sondheim"
"Just fucking figure it out."
"The universe is not here to please you. - Charles Murtaugh"
"Your life is your life. The gods await to delight in you. - Bukowski"
"Join the force and get a pension. - Salesman"
"Beware of things that are fun to argue. - Eliezer Yudkowsky"
"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the result. - Winston Churchill"
"Truth is much too complicated to allow anything but approximations. - John Von Neumann"
"Writing program code is a good way of debugging your thinking. - Bill Venables"
"Don't tell me what you value. Show me your budget, and I'll tell you what you value. - Joe Biden quoting his father"
"Most haystacks do not even have a needle. - Lorenzo"
"Experiment and theory often show remarkable agreement when performed in the same laboratory. - Daniel Bershader"
"The important work of moving the world forward does not wait to be done by perfect men. - George Eliot"
"It is astonishing what foolish things a man thinking alone can come temporarily to believe. - Keynes"
"The purpose of computing is Insight, not numbers. - Richard Hamming"
"Work on stuff that matters. - Tim O'Reilly"
"Sometimes magic is just someone spending more time on something than anyone else might reasonably expect. - Teller"
"You have to say something. It can't all be technique. - Woody Allen (on great actors)"
;; Paraphrased from a HN comment
"Perfectionism is a failure to optimize across a complex goal space, settling, instead, on ignoring the difficult prioritisation problem in favor of over-optimizing a limited set of tangible and easily-defined goals over longer-run priorities"
))Inspirational Words: http://pin.it/thWAFJ4
Life is Short: http://pin.it/XnNjdnN
Quotes: http://pin.it/NE6Lvcl
Aphorisms: http://pin.it/Nt4OYG7
That's really good. Particularly as it relates to non-financial budgets, such as a time budget. In fact it immediately got me out of my chair and up for some physical activity!
* When the winds of change blow, some people build walls while others build windmills. — Chinese proverb
* There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self. - Ernest Hemingway
* If you love life, then don't waste time, for time is what life is made of. - Bruce Lee
* If we are not ashamed to think it, we should not be ashamed to say it - Cicero.
* Do not wait to strike till the iron is hot; but make it hot by striking. - Yeats
* Education is not the filling of a pail but the lighting of a fire. - Yeats
This. x1000. I've found that a lot of disagreement about ways to implement a feature can be solved by keeping this in mind.
I dunno, the usual reactions I get are more in line with the comments on this Stack Overflow post: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/43377533/should-python-er...
For whatever reason, making the case that code that actually performs some useful computation should be closer to the exception rather than the rule tends to result in people completely losing their shit.
In general readability of code has more to do with something like this:
valid_filename = filename.ends_with? ".txt"
return File.open(filename) if valid_filename
Versus something like this: return File.open(fn) if fn.ends_with? ".txt"
The former uses a longer variable that clearly shows what it is and reduces the mental overhead of having to figure out why we're returning (because the file is valid, we're finished with this function as intended).Not this. x1.
Now if this were true, you would read these programs as you would literature. But you don't. Instead, you only use these programs as you would a tool and then complain when they don't do what you want them to do fast enough or reliably enough.
In literature, you have expectations but not certainty about the ending. Only with a bad tool do you expect anything but certainty about the ending. Indeed the hallmark of a good program is that you don't have to read it to know how it ends.
Another anti-parallel is that literature (literate programming) admires originality whereas good engineering admires plagiarism.
1) which, since I was doing the code reviews, I wasn't allowed to write any production code, because who would review my code? :(
you seem to be making ancillary points while being deliberately obtuse about the central one.
Programs are meant to be used and only incidentally for people to read. Some programs, we'll call them closed source, can't even be read, not even by Richard Stallman.
BTW, SICP was a required text in 61A when I took it. Required but then like many bibles, never assigned and never read. A few years later, I tried to but couldn't and so I sold my copy on Amazon. Got $25 for it.
And regardless of the intention, code are read many, many more times than it is written, especially when you work in a company with multiple teams and that is spread out on multiple sites. And in my experience, badly written code causes bugs because the original intention is not clear.
His purpose is altogether simpler. From his paper, the literate programmer focuses on "exposition". He or she "chooses the names of variables carefully and explains what each means", and "strives for a program that is comprehensible... using a mixture of formal and informal methods that reinforce each other."
Literate programming is not there to entertain you. It's there to be understood. Beware the programmer who disdains comprehension of their programs.
Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute.
Literate programming is not there to entertain you. It's there to be understood. Beware the programmer who disdains comprehension of their programs.
Programs are pieces of engineering. As such they are meant to be used. Beware the programmer who admires their programming too much. If they have elegantly solved a problem that will come out in their solution's use and not in its literate form.
This means we need to read code, even our own code, to understand what it's doing. Code that is harder for us to read is harder to work on.
That Wasn’t Mark Twain: How a Misquotation Is Born https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/26/books/famous-misquotation...
> - email from a reader
That is... quite a quote.
Some (start of) context: http://www.idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm
Reading Maciej' comments about PG, HN, and Silicon Valley in general is a wonderful cure to the kind of madness that can pervade the place.
To paraphrase Chesterton quotes have not been tried and found wanting. They have been tried, found hard to abide to, and been abandoned.
Read books, or essays, or at least the whole dang poem (the quoted "The Second Coming" is really short!). It's nearly impossible to pack any kind of meaningful insight into a couple sentences.
I don't understand this. What's the wisdom to be gleaned from this one?
You can learn a few things from this play that I think would help you in life. First is planning for the unexpected and knowing how to respond in a situation where you're about to panic. Given the context of the situation you win almost 100% of the time if you just fall down and do nothing after securing the ball. Great players recognize how to maximize their odds of winning, this rings true in many facets of life.
Second the whole sequence of events is simply incredibly funny, and this quote gives an answer to what everyone would ask after witnessing the play. "What was that guy thinking?"
I have sometimes thought that one reason gay people might exist is that they're God's way of skewering the conservative idea that gender roles are absolutes fixed by nature. It occurred to me the other day that in the same vein, transgender people might be Her way of skewering the liberal idea that gender roles are total societal constructions.
1) The higher the mountain, the more treacherous the path - Frank Underwood
2) What you think, you become - Buddha
3) If you want something you have never had, you must be willing to do something you have never done
I feel like I was born as a rebel.
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/q4td
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/quote4theday
Google Plus: https://plus.google.com/u/0/110672212432591877153/posts
RSS: https://q4td.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default
Blog: https://q4td.blogspot.com/
“I quote others only in order the better to express myself.” — Michel de Montaigne
-David McCullough
Unless it's the HBO miniseries "John Adams", based on his book!
(Of course this is revealed through G-III interviewing a nude john adams on a stool).
Just looked that guy up though, I bet he's got some cool stories!
This one has serious implication, not only in the computer programming world, of course.
[0] Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=egqwsznp_EY [1] Website: https://www.humanquote.com/
"Solving operating systems problems with hardware interrupts is a lot like solving your own personal problems with heroin - at first it sorta works, but after a while things just get out of hand." - Fred B. Schneider, PhD
The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity.
- Yeats, The Second Coming
- Abelson & Sussman, SICP, preface to the first edition
I may need a tattoo of this. (joking but only slightly)
-- George Bernard Shaw
It's a bit eye-rolling whenever a PG essay makes the top page here, but a page of PG's favorite quotes on HN in days when the US slips into a novel blend of kleptocracy and autocracy, the NYT notes the top five tech firms are basically monopolies, and the most successful of the last decade's startups prove fiscally inept at best, ethically-challenged at worst... well, poop.
I want to see good content on HN. Ruling out certain content that might be good, just because of who its author is, is, I think, ridiculous.
HN has also become increasingly hostile to PG's views over time (for example, his inequality essay), so it's hardly an echo chamber. Personally, I preferred this place when there were more people who agreed with his basic worldview. And, though many in SV share his politics, he has a distinct way of thinking when compared with other billionaire thought leaders like Peter Thiel and Marc Andreesen.
Thanks