charlieflowers

Sounds to me somewhat like realizing you can grok a new large source code base by looking at the series of pull requests that got you there. (Without, of course, the benefit of any comments).

I wonder about Helix plugins.

How? Are you saying the Firefox and Chrome code bases are largely based on pure functions?

GPT-360

> People want more REALITY in their life, not less.

Agree with most of what you said. But my take is, people would LOVE virtual reality if it were done well enough. We just don't seem to have the technical capability to pull it off well enough yet. Uncanny valley and all that.

I wasn’t trying to be disparaging. Just informing the poster, sharing a bit of proofreading feedback in the hope they found it helpful.

If I'm optimizing for my brain, my strengths, and my programming style, bottom up is better. With a particular focus on nailing down the hardest or murkiest part, then the next hardest/murkiest, and so on. This phase can be ugly code if that helps ... the point is to uncover unknowns and let points with the fewest degrees of freedom become the first stakes in the ground.

When there are no particularly hard/murky parts left, it's top-down from there, and that let's you choose the approach for various portions of the solution (such as, this part will be pure functions, this part will be based around an arena allocation, etc.).

Even though I mentioned both bottom-up and top-down, the 10,000 foot summary is bottom-up, because it starts there and the most time is spent in that mode.

Whenever I get away from that and go top down too early, I'm likely to run into some area that either gets reworked, or that I compromise on and _wish_ I could justify the time to rework it.

(And also with the caveat that some things are simple enough you could do them any way you want, and those are good candidates for top-down, which also seems more comfortable for more junior devs).

UPDATE: However, I completely agree with another commentor -- start with the UI first! I don't think that contradicts bottom-up ... it's about fleshing out both the requirements and the _potential_ requirements.

That is hard to parse. Eventually I realized you are saying: Didn't a person we refer to as "Wait but Why" post something along these lines recently?

I thought that same thing.

Besides, it wasn't liking a particular _language_ they took as a bad sign, it was _functional programming_.

If you like functional programming, and you encounter a candidate who also likes it, and you consider that a red flag ... that seems highly irrational and inconsistent.

(Not trying to sound combative. I appreciate the original post! Just being candid about something that sounds odd to me).

Edit: I would bet there's more context that was out of scope for the original post. I would not be surprised if it were much more than just "liking functional programming." If someone is overly zealous to the point where you might wonder if they'd start an uprising or storm off in a rage if asked to do anything other than functional programming (or anything else for that matter), that would be a red flag.

> I can commit to 10 minutes of mindfulness each morning .... That 10 minute commitment became a snowball of positive change.

Which particular flavor / approach to mindfulness training did you apply that led to this outcome?

> I've seen ADHD person explain this as having every reason to do the task, know that they need to get started now, and yet, just can't get around to do it. I've certainly felt that in some scenarios in my life. It's like getting the timing to start doing the task is impossible and everything else, no matter how mundane, seems safer and more fulfilling to do.

To the ADHD sufferers out there ... would you say this describes one of the most predominant symptoms? Would you say someone who reads this and says, "That's me," likely has ADHD?

> For me the secret is like the famous Article says: "Attention is all you need". I distract my attention on how much "boring", or "painful" or "humiliating" some work that I believe is important is.

I don't follow ... can you elaborate a bit? Are you saying that, when you feel the work is "boring", for example, you somehow distract your attention from how boring it is?

And if so, how?

True, I think the political elite made a big mistake, revealing the clowns behind the curtain. The younger generation, even with their default disgruntlement with the system, still might've taken another decade to figure out just how much the emperor has no clothes.

I mean, yeah, true. But only in the exact same way that Meta, Google, and a bunch of other American companies do too.

Lawmakers don't care about that. You're giving them way too much credit. Since the public is not in an uproar about this destructiveness, there are no votes or advantages to be gained by advocating against it.

That's for altruists, who rarely make it to Washington and don't last long when they do.

It is mind boggling, and at the same time not surprising at all, that China is enforcing a humane policy to protect its children when we are not willing to do the same.

Agree, but then Meta and others are lobbying (throwing money at those politicians), which buys concern from the lawmakers.

And even then, unfortunately, this was after the analogous "fuzz test" had already failed horrifically. (Not making a dark joke ... I'm pointing out that even the Nobel laureate wasn't allocated and focused in time to prevent the problem, which furthers your argument).

The real concerns, in order of importance, are:

1. This is a way of getting memes to the masses that we (the US political establishment) can't fully control.

2. Meta and others are getting their asses kicked revenue-wise by Tik Tok. Like any business, they'd use anything they could to fight back. Turns out they can use China fear mongering, so they are.

3. (Added) Believe it or not, there's nationalistic pride here. There is a reluctance to admit that an app from "the other side" (China) is more appealing to the masses than _our_ social media apps. Surprising then that we don't ban Hondas and Toyotas, even though they're far superior to American cars (but at least they're made by Asians who are _allies_ I guess).

No matter that banning an app is completely against the principles we claim, such as freedom for individuals, competition in a free market, and freedom of information.

It's not that the number of kinds of glue is large. It's that the one kind of glue (function composition) is particularly powerful.

Hope it wasn't keeping its payroll money in SVB.

To me, THAT is the most powerful intuitive description.

I'm trying to sign up now. The "Next" button after entering mailing address is disabled. Anyone else having that issue?

Wonder if maybe they are no longer taking sign ups?

> but he knew how people behave and act, and so he was able to dictate the entire engagement

This sounds super interesting, but it's so generic I can't get anything concrete from it. Could you elaborate a bit on how he dictated the engagement?

This is a classic and one of the most insightful talks/paradigms I've encountered. One of the few that stands the test of many years.

> But the whole point ... is ... in _search_ (not content generation)

True. And also, keep in mind ... it doesn't truly have to be _better_ than Google search. You just need to start and maintain a _social trend_ so that the mainstream public _chooses_ it over Google. People use Google because it's the first and only option that comes to mind -- they haven't actually compared its accuracy to anything else in a long time (the audience of Hacker News is of course an exception).

Yep. After all, where on Earth does all the tuition money actually go? The buildings are nice and there are way too many overpaid administrators, but even still that can't possibly account for all the $$$ flowing in.

FYI, Stephen Covey (not Richard)

That has been written about quite a bit. Can't remember any of the terms placed on it, but I've seen many Hacker News entries about maximizing that phenomenon.

Why not Typescript?