bpizzi

Well, it does says a lot about users too. The typical user would have a hard time describing a software problem beyond 'I don't know, it is just not working anymore'.

> But, there are these "small" hacks: It joins Z with the ctrl key. Z has to be hit twice to type Z. Sounds like the end of the world, right?

I'm not sure I'm reading you correctly, but you do know that you can change the layout, right?

https://ergodox-ez.com/pages/oryx

> rather a handful of government.

Which are mostly democracies, or sort of. China, Russia and North Korea apart, every big population center is governed in a way or another threw a certain form of consensus.

> humanity at the moment already agrees blindly that the only way forward is reckless growth

Again you talk as if humans were a single body. You're not agreeing blindly on 'reckless growth', as far as I can tell, and you're far from being alone in that case.

Humanity speaking and thinking as one is just a dream (you're free to dream, thought!).

> we could instead revisit the concept we have of growth

You say 'we' like humanity wasn't 7 billions or so completely autonomous actors.

This would be a more accurate sentence: '7 billions autonomous actors could decide to act as one, and the act could be lowering its growth rate'.

You see, it simply won't happen.

That's why there's so much blank space between the paragraphs! /s

> I'm not a child prodigy, so learning anything takes focussed effort over time.

Like (almost) everyone else here.

> The second it gets hard, or boring, my ability to stay on task diminishes rapidly.

Bis.

The thing is to be resilient: keep doing it (staying out of your comfort zone) and eventually you'll push your limits, like everyone else (just ignore the very few geniuses that clearly have some special genes).

The other thing is that it looks like you stayed in that comfort zone for a while, and 2 months is way too short for efforts to have effect. The hard truth is that you may have spent some years in that dreaded comfort zone, and those years are just gone. What you'll you with the incoming years is totally your own business, but whatever you do, just remember: you won the lottery the day your were born, just be happy with yourself for the simple fact that you live :]

This hits home, being born and growing as a kid in Lyon, having played AITD on the family's 386 in 1993/4 or so, and later practiced rowing for years on the Saône river right in front of Atari's ship-shaped buildings, even giving some rowing lesson's to Atari/Infogrames team during a company event (and to Bruno Bonnel himself, who has been later into robotics and today in... politics).

This guy can't be a 10x engineer, because the first thing you learn when being admitted in "Rule #1: you do not talk about 10x engineers" (I can, because I wasn't invited myself and heard it via someone they dumped).

I think that 'to avoid merging or committing to public branches' means 'to avoid pushing' here, specifically the 'to public branches' part.

Because, obviously, it's pushing commits that's problematic, not committing per se (in git vocabulary).

In theory I agree with your stance.

OTOH, in the real world, almost all websites that I've got to migrate are somewhat hardcoded for one domain (I've got this side project were I do websites hosting, good recurring money, little work).

Going for /etc/hosts is the only pragmatic choice here.

At work (enterprise stuff) we've grown tired of duplicating 1000's lines of boring CRUD stuff and turned to code generation. Which is so much better.

The workflow now is:

- think really hard for 10 minutes about the business problem,

- describe it into our meta language (typed structs, UML-like, really simple),

- instantly click'n'build a whole set of API endpoints down to SQL create/alter/drop statements, along with full up to date documentation,

- get excited to be able to deliver so much stuff to customer in no time,

- aaand finally receive a requirement update ('the last one I promise') and send I-love-you letters back in time to our old-selves for such a nice malleable framework (which I dubbed The Platform).

'If we didn’t have exceptions, we would have to write a lot of if-statements all over the place. [...] We can focus on the happy path.'

In my own experience in developing and supporting enterprise class software, focusing on the 'dark path' is much more important than the happy path. My mantra is 'first make it stable, then make it easy to change behavior while remaining stable, then finally add that functionality that the customer says is absolutely mandatory'. But this is very specific to BtoB with big players.

> I'm pretty sure Command+P is much better than anything Vim could offer for quickly opening files

Actually, you're wrong here: https://github.com/kien/ctrlp.vim.

Link to the paper: https://www.karger.com/Article/Abstract/496086

That may be 'Look To Winward', where a war retired Mind is having a lot of philosophical conversations with the local human music composer. Actually this Mind is not actually captaining a moving ship, he's retired into nursing a static orbital and its organic living forms :)

Hey, I see what you're on, don't steal my prospect :D (joking ;))

Two things: build the form and collect the data. Now that I think about it, it's a "surveymonkey" disguised in "change.org", actually.

Sure, the typical customer is this semi-professional non-profit organization that need something more "result driven" than change.org when it comes to build its audience (nothing black hat, really).

It's definitely not a simple CRUD vanilla app, thought.

I've built a petition system that allow users to publish their own petitions and download signatures lists. Got a handful of loyal customers acquired threw relations. MRR is ~500€ since +10 years. Won't give the url here because it's running on a ultra cheap dedicated server at 5€/m, HN would blow it down in one minute :)

> And you're not considering the widespread preference for Buddhist and animist religion [...]

Actually I'm not considering anything, I was just pointing that the theory in the parent's book could be reversed.

Or maybe the starting point is that sapiens' DNA really is shaped for ruling.

That sapiens mostly preferred 'Abrahamic religion' to others is then a consequence to this starting point.

> three or four days learning it

Now this is being ambitious :)

> For example, when deciding on the color of a new logo, or what to do for a company trip, there's no obvious canonically true solution. Therefore, opinions and personal preferences come into play, which is a source of conflict.

Ha, those are great examples where I will absolutely refuse to give my opinion :)

"What's your idea on the new logo color?", "I don't care, I'll be ok with whatever you choose", "No really, tell me", "No really, I don't want to think about it", "I don't get it", "I know you don't". Quit harsh, I conceed :)

Related: bikeshedding and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_triviality

I'm not sure, there's definitely people (I mean, there must be others than myself ;)), mostly introverted, that shine best when they know that the relationship is based on pure facts and no unforeseeable tension may arise from hurt egos.

That being said, maybe we're such a minority that virtually no human group would be comprised of only that kind of mind (even in couples).

> As if that is always possible.

Were your responding to 'make it physically impossible for the child to access a hot oven.'?

If yes, then you're wrong: its (99%) always possible. Just buy and install a kid's barrier and park the 2yo in his room during the cooking. Or use a cold door oven. No need for a 'big enclosure padded out with cotton wool'.

> Many dangers in the real world, you can maybe stop the kid touching an oven, but you won't be always there to stop him/her from dangerous situations.

100% agree, unfortunately. My point was that, agreeing with the parent (no pun intended), at 2yo, you don't loose sight on your child if it's environment is not 100% safe, end of the discussion.

At 2 years old there's only one thing a parent can do to avoid a child touching a hot oven: make it physically impossible for the child to access a hot oven.

> but you don't apply this same litmus to yourself. You could walk across the street. You could [...]

Please stop making assumptions.

I'm actually walking across the street, every single time. I let it go, every single time.

At the end of the day, it's me who's going threw the loop "hell, he could have asked if it was ok at least - nevermind I won't make a fuss", while in those heads its "NEED NICOTIN RITNOW - GET NICOTTIIIIIIN".

> I find it odd that you have one set of standards for how others should treat your desires and a completely separate one for the way you handle theirs.

You're wrong. I'm handling their desire very dearly: I walk away and let them smoking how they desire. And then I'm thinking privately (and publicly here) that this is very unfair indeed, because they don't care about my own standard.

I don't think it's worth pursuing this "you don't see the beam in your own eye" kind of argumentation, because in this very specific case my eye is pristine.

Nope, they can smoke at home, literally 5min before (the are grown adults). Or walk to the other side on the street, 10 meters away, and smoke under a shelter. Or maybe just skip that one cigarette. Or bring an umbrella. I'll stop here.

No, there's no excuses. It's just a case of not having any interest in the other human right next to you.