_aleph2c_

I was surprised by how the author called out Fuller's race at the end of the article as if that had to do with anything. The article read well up to that point, I was being convinced of his thesis. But after seeing his race comment tagged on at the end, I have to discount Martinez's whole presentation; there is a high probability it's just another woke hit-piece. I wish he would have put the racial stuff at the beginning of his writing so I could have ignored him sooner.

It doesn't have to be precise. The founder should wear his own glasses, go to court to defend himself and use a fusion technique: have a lawyer and his AI both reach through his glasses. If he loses, he says, "we have a bit of work to do", if he wins, he wins. Either way, great publicity.

Smart people who are out of work quickly become neurotic. The interview process is an exercise in humiliation. Placing a neurotic person into a series of humiliation rituals is a good way to make them more neurotic.

A better way to get a job is to follow a lighthouse strategy; build something cool, present on it, then side step the humiliation ritual (have the employer agree that you are being evaluated this way). Or cheat, get access to the evaluation procedure before you are evaluated on it. Everyone has their favorite interview problem, and they like to brag about them (see comments below), find out what they are into, then train up on these problems before you engage with their humiliation ritual.

As for therapy, instead I would recommend coaching (someone who works with salespeople), since they are good at rebuilding confidence after each humiliation. Remember, the interview doesn't actually evaluate you, don't believe its results, it's mostly a randomized process. I could come up with simple-seeming problems to stump most people, especially stressed out developers. The author of this post has lost her perspective, and her article is being posted by someone who makes money from the humiliation ritual.

Knowing that you will become neurotic, look for work while you have work. If you are coming out of school, where everyone is single-tracked, know that the corporate world isn't fair. The corporate world is also disorganized, you could call someone within the software group and just ask them how to prepare for the interview, get creative.

As someone who is trying to learn XSLT, I totally agree that it is really hard to learn! It's a functional programming language (lisp-like) that you write with verbose XML syntax. You operate over entire trees, your variables can't be changed and all of your functions are suppose to be written as tail recursions.

With this said, Michael Kay offers a nice series of patterns in chapter 17 of his book "XSLT 2.0 and XPath 2.0 Programmer's Reference". He shows how to use a "Fill-in-the-blanks" stylesheet that someone who only understands HTML can use, then he shows how to make a "Navigational Stylesheet", a "Rule-Based Stylesheet" and finally a "Computational Stylesheet". He shows that you don't necessarily need to use XSLT's functional programming powers, how you can get a lot with a little of it, and how to level up. So it seems like the language was designed to be written by people who don't understand it; it's declarative.

I think a middle ground has been reached, XSLT 3.0 allows you to transform your XML into JSON and back. The XSLT 3.0 (2017) processor is available to non-Java languages from Saxonica, for Python "pip install saxonpy" (Linux only)

If you want to see how to do these XML-to-JSON and JSON-to-XML transforms I have written a little learning repo with a CLI: https://github.com/aleph2c/leaning_xslt

Here is Michael Kay's white paper on Transforming JSON using XSLT 3.0: https://www.saxonica.com/papers/xmlprague-2016mhk.pdf

Once your data is in a JSON format, you could implement your compact-binary-format idea around it.

If you write out an idea that sounds plausible and well-thought-out, it doesn't mean that reality will agree with you, it means you have become a better politician. If you have passed it through a committee, and they agree with your idea, it means you are closer to the zeitgeist, not to reality.

As any one in here knows from troubleshooting complex systems, the first seemingly sensible idea is usually wrong. To understand, you need many ideas, and to systematically update your model and disprove each hypothesis, using the evidence, and the build up in your intuition, to tune your next hypothesis. Science is more about hacking than it is about getting a well-written paper past a committee. The feedback loop shouldn't be slowed down with a political step.

If you are talking to a manager and you can't get them to understand why they need to pay the Nuitka author, talk about insurance. "If this guy doesn't get paid, he will abandon a key piece of our infrastructure (which speeds everything up by at least 3x, saving us X dollars/year) and we will be stuck with a maintenance time bomb in our system. If we pay this tiny fraction of what he is worth as a consultant, we are effectively joining an industrial alliance to support this technology. It's a good deal, think of this as out sourcing to the competent. If we don't pay him, we can use his stuff for free for a little while, but we will have a huge charge of Y dollars to pull his stuff out when he needs to get another job. Refactoring our system at that time will be risky and expensive, and we will get nothing for it. Think about this is cheap insurance, or hedging a bet. It's a good deal, I would sleep better at night if I knew the rest of our system could be structured this way."

What is an edgelord?: https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/what-is-an-edg...

VR chat exists already, and it's fun :)

\LaTeX is a tax on the smart.

Once you have been hazed by it, you will start to defend it: LaTeX drives cognitive dissonance in its users.

Nobody will build the next thing, because LaTeX is free and there are millions of plugins and lots and lots of people with Stockholm syndrome ready to defend it.

I have built documentation systems for clients with LaTeX, but regular developers won't touch it, they know better, so the docs go stale. It's better to use restructured text/html/css, since it has a lot more features than markdown, yet it's simple enough that people who haven't been LaTeX-hazed will use it too.

It's super smart to turn a project disaster into free advertising for your website! I hope your gambit pays off.

MLM: Multilevel Marketing scheme

Maybe she should buy a shovel and work with him. Also, there is a good chance this story is fake, that it is an advertisement beacon for a movie or something.

This may be true, but when things break people will look for a scapegoat. So when things break, and you are mostly-responsible for initiating the failure, use collective language ("we" and not "I"), frame the failure as a systems failure when you are talking to management or the executives, look cool even if you are feeling stressed out. Manage the narrative! Sure, you flipped the switch or whatever, but try and survive the event. Just because you think its a system's failure doesn't mean other people share this belief, don't volunteer to be thrown off the bus.

YouTube and Google will get their lumps when the Democrats are swept out of power. Forward this information to Rand Paul's office, the Republicans will need a justification for the policy changes they make once they are installed.

Rand Paul has been starting his recent video's talking about how YouTube is cancelling him (a US Senator) and he advertises for Rumble.

I don't like diesel fumes either, but I'm surprised to see so many Americans signing up for an informant society. There are other ways to solve this problem.

I think that there are answers out there, many coming from Stephen Kotkin, a man who destroyed his eye sight studying Stalin, who is an expert on the collapse of the Soviet Union, and who is trying to reboot the American diplomatic service. He talks about how we in the west must stop demonizing each other. We have the ability to solve our problems, but our political parties make it impossible to get the right people on our ballots. (In Canada I just join all the parties and vote within them, since a vote within is worth 50 votes without).

Kotkin is non-partisan, and we should all take notice of what he says. video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ul1gsIdlJFs transcripts: https://www.hoover.org/research/5-questions-stephen-kotkin-1

Mike Solana calls this Trudeau's rainbow-colored iron fist: https://www.piratewires.com/p/shock-and-awe?utm_source=url

My concern is for the long-term survival of their institution. I see them as a critical, slow-moving part of our civilization. I don't understand how it works; I'm an individual, and they are an ancient religious institution.

Here is an example, the Catholics resisted eugenics when it was considered scientific and rational. If I had been involved in the debate at that time, I probably would have been on the eugenicists' side because that was the popular point of view. I would have been wrong. The Catholics provide a slow moral feedback loop.

My point about the pedophile is that they can't hide them now. The internet has changed the game. The Church worked even with its warts in the past because the Church hid them from view. But they don't have this power anymore. More and more families will leave as the warts are exposed. They will lose members and relevance.

So remove the pressure, remove the temptation before it happens. I believe the Catholics call this "an occasion of sin": Don't go into the hotel room drunk and horny with the prostitute so that you don't have a moral struggle while sitting on the bed beside her. A challenging problem is turned into an easy problem by avoiding it in the first place. If they are worried about the corruption that can happen from priests having families, make it so they can't have families but can still find a remedy for their basic needs. Make it easier for a priest to be a priest. The early Christian Church did not have the celibacy rule.

What's worse is other religious-like systems are antagonistic to the Catholic perspective. The Chinese Communist Party effectively owned Grindr for a time, and they could have built a social network map of the transgressing priests using their app. Then they could have leveraged these guys to do their bidding. It's hard to lead a flock while being blackmailed by another Sheppard.

Yes, it's true, but they can change their own rules. I'm sure there have always been sexual transgressions, my family left their church two generations ago because of a pedophile priest (Father Butch in Dauphin Manitoba). Search is cheap and getting cheaper, and their institution is being damaged by a policy that wants to defy gravity. The Catholic church is ancient, and no doubt resilient, but it has never had to contend with anything like the Internet.

If they are worried about their priests having children, why don't they use technology? Separate the fertility problem from sexual desire and the need for intimacy. A young priest could have a vasectomy before taking over his own church. Then he could establish a healthy relationship without having to hide his needs.

If this is true, it spells the end of traditional farming practices and an end to starvation.

Git isn't going away, so we might as well master it.

If you would like to know more about how to manipulate the git graph, take this excellent (and free) training:

https://learngitbranching.js.org/

To slowly level up, you can watch video demonstrations from Dan's git school. Dan provides 48, 30 minute training videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZEGnam2M9s&list=PLu-nSsOS6F...

Maybe in retaliation to this "legal" attack on open infrastructure, DNS providers should de-list Sony domains.

Freeman Dyson didn't think much of Wittgenstein: https://www.youtube.com/embed/byi3vOnVodQ?start=58

The people who have jobs in zombie firms are fragilizing their careers. If you are just managing a process, your job will be automated. Your leadership won't hesitate to lay you off. If your firm is protected by intellectual property which isn't respected by China, and your firm doesn't even have the skills to defend its own network, you can't keep your "property". If you train your Asian partners how to work within your regulatory framework, they will just hire a few members of your staff away, then open a competing firm in your own country and completely dominate you. The whole western system is being dismantled, thank you McKinsey & Company.

Why don't people leave? Because they want their buy-out. They want the package that comes from grinding all of those years away at the zombie firm.

Maybe Apple should hire Steve Ballmer, I hear he's available: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OHVhiybBb1U

Agreed, and as such the Linux community should counter signal to gain deterrence. If you do this kind of thing and you get caught, a simple apology is not enough: you get banned. It's a kind of a game theoretic approach.

If I have to get through boring material, like technical manuals or things written in a tedious fashion, I use a text-to-voice synthesizer (balabolka on windows). I have hacked balabolka to use the Cortana voice, and over time I have increased its reading speed. Now 'she' sounds like a chipmunk on meth. If I need to get through a book, I buy the paper copy, then obtain a pdf and run it through the synthesizer... I read the book while the synth squirrel-speaks the words. If I find something interesting, I'll turn off the synth, then slow down and go over the good spot in slow motion, reading and link-think what I'm reading to other things I know.

Mallory Harris is critiquing Dr. Levit because he is not agreeing with the scientific consensus. She is also holding him accountable for re-interpretations of his twitter stream. If this is true, then anyone with any authority or rank should stop using twitter or say anything at all; there is always a chance that someone else can twist your words and use your authority to back their case.