deanotron

When I meditate I often combine it with tiny yoga exercises - not formal yoga poses, but just stretching and going where my body wants to stretch. What's funny is that I often find myself in a position similar to Muslim prayer (or, if one were observing from the outside they might think that is what I was engaged in).

[edit] I bring this up because whether engaged secular-ly or not there is something very grounding about the experience.

Yes, simply because I like the experience. "It feels good, man".

There is a lecture by Alan Watts where he denounces the idea of "meditating on an idea" as well as meditating for personal gain - ie benefits to work / life.

I think it's very similar to orgasm (in form and function). Yes, there are health benefits and stress benefits as a side-effect, but the experience itself should be the main draw.

[edit] Alan Watts @11:38: https://youtu.be/26971uJuQuk?t=11m38s

There is a large difference between the ability to read emotions and "..vicariously experiencing the feelings, thoughts, and experience of another..".

A great salesman can also be sociopathic. We are all salesmen to some extent, so this isn't to denigrate the profession or the ability to read people and use it for personal gain.

I suppose the difference lies in whether what one is selling tends towards symbiosis or exploitation.

I haven't seen anyone mention this but part of the success is that they had git in their name. All social platform successes aside, they had the right technology at the right time.

Before I had ever heard of GitHub, I had seen presentations at the large company I worked for praising git. Git was thrown into the limelight at the same time as subversion, CVS, perforce etc. were being eschewed.

This is true about infrequent updates - it may be more for providing the appearance of total control.

I would love to see a user-friendly universal app for managing static sites (Jeckyl, Docpad) that is something someone of my Mom's tech capability could use. (and let's be honest, WP itself is sometimes "way too much")

I agree that React and all the sweetness it contains does have this effect when working on a large - or simply dynamic - application.

But all of the benefits of the React Virtual DOM don't really come into play if the content is static (like most WordPress sites). If no data is changing, you don't need observables to automatically update views, and the built in underscore.js templating will do a fine job.

HHVM was needed at Facebook because it's a dynamic app with rapidly changing content.

WordPress sites are typically static content that are perfectly fit for static caching with a CDN - it really shouldn't matter how many milliseconds you are able to save on the server if your site is only being hit once every two hours from the CDN.

The 8 million caching plugins are unnecessary when you can just sign up for cloudflare.

Static CMS's are great for personal projects, or very tech-friendly clients, but most clients paying for a website want the ability to manage content in a user friendly way.

I'm sure the vast majority of WP sites have been built for a paying client.

The thing about WordPress is that for most clients you'll likely end up running on a managed WP server like WP Engine.

The vanilla WP environment means goodies like React (which requires V8 to compile on the server) and HHVM are not in the cards. But PHP and WordPress really doesn't need to be fast (just put it behind a CDN).

Isomorphic rendering over the WP-API is all you need - I've had a lot of benefit using logic-less templates like Handlebars on the client and the server.

Very Nice. Writing glsl shaders is one area where live-reloading is a must.

glslify has me excited, I've mostly used Three.js when writing shaders (even fullscreen no-geometry shaders) simply because they have libraries for loading images. I'm hoping that stack.gl / glslify will tackle a minimal overhead asset loading solution for WebGL projects.

Edit: Found stackgl texture library, now to go about building support for 3D cube/spherical maps. https://github.com/stackgl/gl-texture2d

SEEKING WORK - Vancouver BC or Remote (US & Canadian citizen)

Full Stack Engineer (actually fullstack - a strong aesthetic and eye for design included). Technical founder at modern startup looking for consulting work to pay the bills.

Been working with modern javascript stacks for the past 3 years (node, coffeescript, backbone/angular, couchdb, web sockets, grunt, and cloud services galore).

Before that 5+ years with Python, Rails, and everything related to 3D in an R&D role at a household name company.

View a Youtube demo reel of two of our products for UX feel (all FE and BE code by me). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Ue0aFgO9w

email: dean {at} utl.io

Exactly - the ambiguity related to what is 'viable' is what allows any first-run product to be called an MVP.

Nobody releasing a product into the wild is going to be 100% happy with every aspect of it - it is then labeled as a MVP.

On the flipside, throwing ideas against the wall to see what sticks may be far too "minimum" in a saturated market.

The viability is what drives the whole concept.

The warnings comparing carbon-nanotubes to asbestos are simply because of the shape of the structure - they are both microscopic needles and our white blood cells don't do a good job of breaking them down.

Not all nanomaterials are dangerous (just as varying sizes of dust are not), but many new materials may adopt unnatural properties that our body doesn't know how to deal with. So there is still handwavyness to it all.

Push all things all the time? http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4774490

how about a whole library of them? http://lenr-canr.org/

I'm sorry, but that's just not true. There have been 1000+ replications / reports of excess energy from this very same "anomalous energy effect" - the hard part is the how and why.

See the very same Joseph Zawodny speak of "It has the demonstrated ability to produce excess amounts of energy.." in a much more candid way: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JBlKc0TaqPs

For a good compilation of LENR related evidence, see this presentation from ICCF-17 in September: http://www.slideshare.net/tylervan/lenr

I've been following the Rossi Ecat spectacle since stumbling upon it in 2011, and I think LENR (cold fusion) will be the biggest story on the planet in a few months time. I'm a 'believer'.

The Believers movie just came out a week ago: http://www.thebelieversmovie.com/

Also Rossi is featured in this month's Popular Science: http://pesn.com/2012/10/16/9602208_Andrea-Rossis_Black-Box--...

I'm not sure that this will ever be a fair statistic because coffeescript should never really be used for shared / module code IMO. I love CS for my application code but would never release a package on github in CS, only JS.

Once you are releasing things outside of your controlled/team environment using anything but JS is just a loop for others to jump through.

That is a good example, and something that is eased by syntax highlighting (although I rarely implement double-bar function literals, keeping a pythonic 'self = this' reference is preferrable in most cases)

Although it is all subjective aesthetics, CS shines when paired with underscore.js, and really all "callback-as-last-argument" paradigms, ie:

  _.each items, (item) ->
     # do stuff with item
     # ...

(edited formatting, also what alec said below :)

I've been using coffeescript for about two years - I thought it was the best way to keep the pleasant aesthetic of python, which was my favorite language, and have been happy working with it ever since.

I just want to throw out a positive experience with it and to say that I don't support the author's premise of "here's some misleading things you can do with CS, therefore CS is unreadable". This applies to all languages, and 'fanciful' features and syntax should be avoided almost always in every language for the sake of readability.

There are MANY reasons not to use coffeescript, but JS is all functions all the time, and -> is my best friend.

I'm not so sure the "next Ruby on Rails" necessarily prescribes a full stack framework like meteor.

They have an impressive demo that showcases what you can do with full stack javascript, but having spent a few years now in that full stack environment.. none of it is new. ie. all of this is out there, just not packaged together.

IMO the next Rails is anti-Rails. It's more about building from the ground up than having all your decisions made for you. (meteor packages?? Fibers?? no thanks.)