TempleOS: FlightSim and FirstPersonShooter [video]
youtube.com
youtube.com
I get very nostalgic reading about your work Terry, I haven't done anything low-level since I started playing with the C64.
Skip to 11:30, it's amazing; the editor includes binary data - in this case 3d models - which are rendered within the editor in real time.
I wish I could wrangle low-level stuff as well as you.
super dope C skills bro.
Sure, they could do something, but it would only be to humor him. I don't think that we should be encouraging that.
When his stuff is posted here he's getting real respect from his peers. His illness it totally irrelevant. It would be sad and IMHO wrong to turn him into some sort of VC "circus freak" attraction.
On the other hand doing something truly altruistic to help him would be of course would be very nice.
Keep up the work. You're an inspiration to all of us.
Edit: grammar
I will say that the oracle part of his OS is a random text generator that he interprets as coded messages from god. At least that is what I read in an interview.
Very, very strange, interesting cosmology he has.
https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=TerryADavis
I have been following his coding for quite a while and I think it is really impressive.
It also reminds me of the story of Bolero's dementia, a bit: http://www.radiolab.org/story/217340-unraveling-bolero/
A lot of artists were mentally ill, and took up painting as a form of therapy.
In the USA they used to put the stupid with the smart in special schools and asylums for people with a mental illness. Once they changed that there are more disabled people now in society with a mental illness.
http://petroleusesletter.wordpress.com/2015/05/18/why-are-th...
On the one hand that doesn't give someone carte blanche to do whatever they want. If he started stabbing people we'd (hopefully) put him in a place where he couldn't do that anymore, e.g. some sort of inpatient program.
On the other hand, it's a little hard to take anything he writes/says with any sort of gravity given the obvious schizophrenia. It's a little like if a very small (like, just learned to speak) child dropped an N bomb. I don't think most of us would attribute any malice to it, more just see it as a reflection of mental immaturity. Unfortunately, whereas you can correct a child, you can't really correct a schizophrenic.
So I guess the solution is just to draw attention to it but take it with a grain of salt? I dunno.
If I was diagnosed with autism it would be different, Microsoft and others have plans to hire autistic people. But schizophrenia and autism get treated with the same medication.
I learned meditation from Buddhism to screen out negative thoughts. You can correct a schizophrenic. John Forbes Nash Jr. was a schizophrenic and he got better over the years until he died recently in a taxi crash.
I can't explain Terry's racism, or his behavior. He does have programming skills and a high IQ and can produce results.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/27/opinion/sunday/schizophren...
Sometimes when you have a high IQ, you develop a mental illness as a side-effect.
People thought Steve Jobs was Schizophrenic: http://www.thoughtsontransitions.com/2011/11/reading-steve-j...
> John Forbes Nash Jr
That's not really fair - John Nash was an exceptional person in a myriad of different ways. He's very much an exceptional case in the same way that Stephen Hawking is very much an exception when it comes to ALS.
In general, it's a pretty poor idea to confront someone suffering from disorganized thinking caused by schizophrenia about that disorganized thinking (maybe not in a clinical context, I wouldn't know). Just because John Nash was able to function to a high degree without medication doesn't mean that everyone will be able to, or that it's fair to hold everyone to that standard.
Most thought I was autistic and not schizophrenic, but schizoaffective disorder is rare and like a combo of bipolar and schizophrenia. It is not as bad as schizophrenia, and you have some schizophrenics who are in a mental hospital for life because they can't cope with it.
I used to earn a good salary as a programmer, but management didn't want someone sick with a mental illness working for them. I had worked so hard and stressed myself out that I developed the mental illness and ended up on short-term disability. When I returned two weeks later I was fired for having a panic attack and not snapping out of it. After that my career was over and it was hard finding work that wouldn't give me a hard time for being mentally ill.
How about, instead, "You can correct some schizophrenics"?
For me, that would put them on about the same level as Tea Partiers or AGW deniers -- I'd treat them as individuals and make a judgement call based on whether I might be able to have a reasonable conversation with that particular individual.
Tea Partiers and AGW Deniers chose to be that way, a schizophrenic didn't chose to be that way they developed a mental illness and it might even be genetic or due to environmental factors.
I know many people with a diagnosis of schizophrenia or schizophrenia style illnesses.
They're all kind of embarressed about the shenanigans they get up to when they're ill. I don't know anyone who wants to get a free pass on bad behaviour just because they have a severe and enduring mental illness.
Empathy and understanding and a bit of tolerance, yes.
How many of them want to be shamed, bullied, and ostracized for it?
"He's schizophrenic so he can't control his outbursts" flows into "he's schizophrenic so we sadly can't employ him" - and we know from research that this discrimination happens.
Also: it is intensly frustrating that people leap to absurd extremes. Nothing in my post can be read as "it's okay to ostracize him".
What I meant to say is that confronting a schizophrenic about their delusions or disorganized thinking is almost assuredly a futile exercise, save maybe if you're a very well-trained professional. He clearly suffers from some paranoid delusions[0][1], and I don't think talking to him about the perils of racism is going to prove fruitful anytime soon.
> "he's schizophrenic so we sadly can't employ him"
In some cases, that's probably true - Terry Davis very likely being one of those cases. Conversely, my uncle is quite schizophrenic (pretty severe delusions and paranoia) but responds well to medication and is now gainfully employed, mostly because he hasn't said anything like "Spoiler alert, CIA. Guess how this ends? I have God. I win. You unconditionally surrender and suck my fucken dick. That's how this ends." [2] in quite some time.
Some people will require a large amount of care and probably aren't well-suited for the workforce. Why is that a bad thing? Your employment status doesn't reflect your worth as a person. We can, and should (not that we always do) take care of people unable to work. We have more than enough productive surplus to support their needs.
0: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/38u4zc/flight_s...
1: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/38u4zc/flight_s...
2: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/38u4zc/flight_s...
It's less because Terry couldn't make a useful contribution and more that he not really interested. He's had jobs in the past where he was no more or less ill. From what I've read of his life history, he walked away rather than got fired.
With a very patient and understanding manager, a very isolated workspace or maybe a couple very patient and understanding coworkers, and probably someone filtering all of his communication, it would be workable. I can see why Terry would not want to be an environment like that, of course.
That's not to say that someone wouldn't take a chance on him given his strong technical ability, but I'm not sure most people would look on that decision in retrospect as a good one.
Here, think of it this way: how would you respond to someone that said, "He's paralyzed from the waist down so he can't control his legs ... and therefore he's unemployable"? (Assuming of course that the job doesn't actually require working legs.)