Lyngbakr

Is EndeavourOS relatively lightweight? I currently use Archcraft with Openbox, since it's a light Arch distro without bloatware that's easy to install, and I've been really pleased so far, but I'm always curious about alternatives.

That's a good question. I tend to plug my phone in whenever I get in the car, so unfortunately I don't have a good feel for battery life yet. I didn't notice an issue with my Pixel 6a, though.

That sounds like a pretty sweet deal!

On Friday, I switched to the Pixel 7a with GrapheneOS and it's costing me CAD$1 per month for the phone on a 24-month contract and I got a better deal on my monthly phone plan. So far, it seems like an awesome phone and the installation of GrapheneOS via the web installer was incredibly easy.

> You can easily practice Buddhism in the modern context without the baggage.

An excellent book on this exact topic is Buddhism Without Beliefs by Stephen Batchelor[0]. Very readable & super short. Recommended!

[0]https://www.amazon.com/Buddhism-Without-Beliefs-Contemporary...

I love these because it feels like the constraints imposed by size has encouraged folks to be creative. And there's a fair bit of diversity among the sites.

As much as I think that minimal black text on a white background can be quite elegant, there are so many sites that follow this pattern in the original link that they end up eliciting little more than a shrug from me.

Agreed. And I also think Adam is a great host. He asks good questions and lets the guest talk.

A nice thing about Org-Mode is that you can keep an active todo list in one file for daily tasks and then at the end of the day send all done items to an archive file (C-c C-x C-a). That way, you still have all your tasks in a searchable format if you ever need to go back to them, but the active file — which you open each day — is small and snappy.

I'm curious if you can put your finger on exactly why you find it fun?

(While I've never used CL, I do use Clojure and similarly find it huge amounts of fun.)

> Where you get into trouble is losing focus on solving your real practical problems.

Absolutely agree. As I say YMMV, but my experience is that often people have adopted tools because "that's what data teams use" rather than because it's the best tool for the job. Often, we could — and should — build an in-house solution that fits perfectly rather than buying (every month) an imperfect solution.

IME, it has usually stemmed from "that's how everyone else is doing it, so we should too" without considering specific use/business cases. Senior management were simply not willing to deviate from the norm.

I've worked in data for a while now as an Data Engineer, Data Scientist, and Director and working with experienced software engineers has highlighted to me that most of the data stack is fluff. All the layers/tools that are heaped upon one another just lead to complexity and dependence on paid services. I'm not advocating for reinventing the wheel, but rather that a bespoke solutions seem to be worth the cost. In short, I'd prefer to spend the budget on experienced developers who can build maintainable systems than on a plethora of MDS tools. YMMV, though.

While not a perfect solution, I think organisations like Codeberg§ are a step in the right direction.

§ https://codeberg.org/

I'm curious how Datomic local stacks up against SQLite for embedded databases. Is there a clear use case when I should use Datomic over SQLite?

I'm currently halfway through The Idea Factory: Bell Labs & the Great Age of American Innovation by Jon Gertner. The stories and characters behind all the inventions and ideas are absolutely fascinating, as is the culture they cultivated there. Definitely recommended!

Last year, we began testing Polars with TypeScript because I'd heard great things about it for Python in terms of performance and usability. Unfortunately, I ran into bugs that first morning that stopped us in our tracks. I'll definitely give it another shot once they've ironed out the kinks as it looks very promising, but it wasn't ready for prime time for us.

Back when I worked in scientific programming, we adopted a similar approach. The heavy lifting functions we wrote in C, but they were called from R which allowed us to plot the results, etc., easily. And the libraries we used (for solving differential equations) were all old school Fortran libraries.

If I were to start again today, I think I'd give Julia a look, though.

Out of curiosity, why did you stop using it daily?

That's interesting! Although I haven't invested any thought in it, I would've assumed that announcing plans would have the opposite effect because people are now watching and know what you're trying to achieve, so you'd be more motivated to avoid losing face. Thanks for the article — I'll have to check it out!

I realise I'm in the minority, but I personally like using the right assignment operator (->) with pipes because it maintains the flow of the code when reading.

mtcars |> filter(am == 1) |> select(mpg, gear) -> df

> However, this blog post won’t be 100% comprehensive, or even the best starting point for most people. That’s because I’m writing this for myself. I find that the best way to learn new things is by "forcing myself" to re-explain them to others.

I really like this attitude and have started embracing it myself both on paper and in notes on my website.

Alternatively, would fzf work in vterm?

Whoa — that's amazing!

This is very cool! I'm curious if it'd be relatively straightforward to use Fennel‡ with MicroLua?

‡ https://fennel-lang.org/

> Questioning everything gets results, not friends.

I'd argue that it depends how it's done. I used to work with a brilliant Data Scientist who had a PhD in AI. She asked so many questions — often about fundamentals — that it was like working with the Riddler. She generated a ton of insight as a result and identified missteps before they happened. Despite questioning everything she was arguably the most liked person at the company because of how she approached it. It didn't feel like being grilled, but rather that she was super interested in people and what they were working on.

My point is that questioning everything can get results and friends if done correctly.

I agree, but I personally also need a couple of WFH days each week so I can be completely without distraction for tasks that require deep thought. My concentration is broken easily and I find other people talking across desks to each other or walking around in the office area distracting. When I'm WFH they simply can't distract me, as my notifications are switched off and I'm alone.

The premise of the article really resonated with me because I've noticed myself doing the same. My shelves are full of books on various programming languages that I read enthusiastically. But how many have I actually built anything nontrivial with? Very few. I find my motivation ebbing away when it comes to sitting down and writing code. I think the hardest part is just getting started, so I'm scheduling time each day to write something. It doesn't have to be fantastic, just something to get me moving forward.

James Trunk, who is now Griffin's VP of Engineering, gave one of the most clear and enjoyable technical introductions to Clojure I've seen. Recommended!

https://youtu.be/C-kF25fWTO8?si=PnjMNLdBLJ8zqSu-

Are you using Scheme in production? I'm super curious about it being applied in the "real world", as I'm currently working my way through SICP.

This. I love getting stuck into new-to-me technologies that are tried, tested, and still around. Is this a good idea from a career perspective? I'm not sure. While I knew some SQL before, I'm deep diving now and I'm sure that'll be useful in snagging future jobs in the data space. But learning Lisp? The principles and perspectives I pick up will no doubt be applicable elsewhere, but perhaps not the language. But then again, not everything is about career progression — I'm really doing it for fun and on that front it's certainly delivering!

> I’m positive that there is a Lispy language out there (actually in existence, or the aether) that is appropriate for embedded work, but the constraints of the target make it difficult to envision.

Perhaps Fennel* fits the bill?

* https://fennel-lang.org/