de_keyboard

None of the examples you give encourage (or even properly support) statically-typed functional programming with immutable data. The purpose of F# is to be an FP language with an emphasis on getting things done.

I think you should look again :)

Babel pipeline is a good one: https://babeljs.io/docs/en/babel-plugin-proposal-pipeline-op...

Combine it with Lodash FP: https://github.com/lodash/lodash/wiki/FP-Guide

Functional programming in Python sucks for a few reasons:

- Lack of pipe operator

- Multiple arguments everywhere instead of currying

- No do-notation or equivalent

- Reference equality rather than structural equality for objects etc.

If you want to program in this style, consider using F#, R or even JavaScript with a few Babel plugins.

Great talk: Constraints Liberate, Liberties Constrain — Runar Bjarnason

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GqmsQeSzMdw

Is it though? If chips had fewer practical applications, fewer people will buy them.

What's cool about IPFS is that anyone can pin the content and the user doesn't have to migrate anything. This makes hosting far more liquid, which should drive down prices.

Yes, the many small competitors scenario means no one achieves economies of scale. There is little to no dead-weight inside each company, but consumers must pay more because the overall system is inefficient.

Going back to the "mega-corp" scenario, if you are a lazy person, a good strategy would be to join an org in a defensible (ideally monopolized) industry and work just hard enough to not get fired. Find yourself a bullshit job!

I think bullshit jobs are a consequence of massive orgs, which have similar internal problems to command economies seen in places like the USSR. Is it surprising that there is massive waste? However, these large orgs continue to exist since the industries they are in have massive barriers to entry, reducing competition and allowing for lots of dead weight.

That falls under the case I mention of "tool is superior".

Am I the only one who doesn't care what a tool / software package is written in, provided it does the job? If a Rust port is superior then sure, I'll use it, but I won't use it because it was written in Rust.

It's very strange. In the UK you often pay a fortune to sit on a nearly empty train. This doesn't even seem like pricing optimized for profit, let alone general carbon reduction across all modes of transport.

In that sense it is not bad. The problem is that it creates perverse financial incentives for large sections of the population to be incarcerated as a cheap supply of labour. Prison labour also undercuts minimum wages in some cases. Consider that for-profit prison companies spend millions of dollars on lobbying efforts.

> If I’m building a marketplace business in 2021, where I want to be “crypto-first” instead of relying on PayPal and Stripe Connect, where do I start?

Unless you are building a dark web market, why would you want to? It will be more convenient for the vast majority of users to pay with card or PayPal.

It's the Chinese Mind thought experiment

> just look at teachers unions, where pay is totally disconnected from competence and performance

I think this is a poor example because the challenge exceptional teachers have is that it's really hard to prove their outcomes in a short time-span. It might be 10, 20, 30 years before it becomes clear that a teacher had a large positive impact on the world, and by then they likely won't be around to collect a bonus.

Compare this to say, a trader who can point to hard PnL numbers over the previous quarters, or a sales person who has shipped X units.

Anyone done a correlation analysis of Big-5 traits and favourite programming languages?

Great to see Records come to Java, although without the "with" feature they are pretty half-baked.

I give it 5-10 years before we've tricked everyone into writing OCaml / F#!

I think "attacking" Crazy New Ideas is how we develop them, iron out the kinks and test our understanding. Criticism is an essential part of the journey from crazy new idea to accepted wisdom.

However, the main problem I have with with this article is that it divides people into domain experts and the rest. This kind of black and white thinking is pervasive in PG essays, and always lead to a cute conclusion. You can have two domain experts that disagree. You can have an idea that spans multiple domains, and there are no (or few) experts in all of them. Maybe the Crazy New Idea seems brilliant to experts in one domain, but only because they don't grasp the others.

I was disappointed with Warzone.

* Best load-outs are faster to unlock with the paid game, so it is semi play-to-win

* Warzone client is MASSIVE (seriously, like fill your entire SSD massive) because it installs other games alongside

* Servers are awful, with extremely low tick-rates, so movement and shooting feels pretty ropey

* A general sense of sameyness crept in after a few hours. I have a hunch that this is due to a low skill ceiling to the mechanics. Whilst I'm sure this makes the game more accessible to a wider audience, I found it left me with no sense of progression. Like eating a Big Mac rather than a nourishing meal.

OCaml solves this elegantly by making the equality functions parameters to the constructor of the collection type.

> The thing is, what the "best" tool is, is relative to your requirements.

Yes I agree, but I think my point still stands :)

Flow failed because Microsoft enabled TypeScript by default in VS Code. It had nothing to do with OCaml in my opinion.

However, TypeScript is now suffering from long compile-times because it targets JS. If it was implemented in a language with more control over threading etc. I think it could be faster.

Makes sense to me. We should be using the best tool for the job, and JavaScript isn't always the best tool.

Work is not perfectly elastic but time is still by and large tradeable for money.

Maybe get on Uber?

(2) leads to fewer deaths overall than (1). (1) gives better quality of life to the healthy than (2). (3) leads to fewer deaths than (1) or (2), but it requires political will. If you can pull it off, (3) is what you want. That's a big "if" though.

As a healthy person, I personally would have been better off under (1). However, I think the economic and emotional damage of that number of deaths would have been too much for society as a whole.

The lock-downs imposed in (2) countries were very effective and given a bit more time (and political will) they could have transitioned to strategy (3).

Australia and China managed to do this.

I think there were broadly 3 strategies:

1. Do very little intervention, but perhaps isolate the vulnerable. This was the "Sweden strategy".

2. Do big interventions if cases rise, but only so far as is required to prevent hospitals being over-whelmed. This was the strategy in most of Europe, and in particular the UK.

3. Do big interventions with the intention of reaching "covid zero", including restrictions on international travel. This was the strategy of Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and perhaps China (hard to get the full story).

Having spent the past year under (2) I wish I was living under (3). Sure it's painful in the short term, but compared to rolling lock-downs for over 12 months?

If your language has do-notation or something like it, then CPS can be quite readable.

With the syntax:

    cps {
      let! x = doThisThing
      let y = x * 2 + 3
      let! z = doOtherThing y
      return z + 1
    }

Without the syntax:

    doThisThing.Then(fun x -> 
      let y = x * 2 + 3
      doOtherThing(y).Then(fun z -> 
        z + 1
      )
    )

> people actually don't like to have to rely on public transport for everything

I'm not advocating complete removal of private cars, but people need to be able to build daily routines that do not require them.

For example, you might live in a village or suburban town, walk to the station and get the train to nearest city where you walk to work. You still have a car for weekends and random errands.

Even within a car dependent lifestyle, car usage can be reduced. This was possible with old style "high streets" where you could drive there, park once, visit a number of shops and businesses then drive home. Now, you travel between a few big box stores much further out of town.

You are assuming that commutes are only possible by private car. Sure some of them are, but it would be preferable if commutes were by foot, bike, train, bus... and private car a distant last. This has been achieved in a few places in the world, most of them in Europe.

You get the outcomes you build for, when it comes to transport infrastructure.