dimitrios1

But there is a risk of dying from heating up tissue.

> Modern goods are fractally complex: individuals can't be expected to become experts in all the disciplines required to judge the quality of a good

Indiviuals do not have to understand the fractals of complexity inherent in what it took to make a finished product to know if the finished product is good quality or not.

Let's just say for the sake of argument I do not understand 1/10th of what goes into HVAC systems, or what it takes to make them. I don't understand supply chain and part sourcing. I don't understand the engineering schematics that underpin the design of the control board that runs my given HVAC unit, therefore, have no expert knowledge of HVAC systems. But what I do know, as an end user / consumer is, if you sell me a Lennox, its most likely going to be a piece of shit, and therefore I do not want a Lennox HVAC system.

I don't know many, if any, fast food places in America that don't have wifi, coffee, fries, and try to keep their restaurant clean (Calling McDonalds clean is debatable). Taco Bell? Even they have Nacho Fries and coffee.

From what I understand (could be wrong): McDonalds forces their franchises to buy these Taylor ice cream machines, and despite the high cost and frequency oof repairs, McDonalds franchisees continue to own and operate McDonalds meaning that despite the troubles, it is still worth it. If the ice cream machine caused a big of an issue, McDonalds would see less franchisees, and discern from their research that the machine was an issue, and change brands.

Again, it starts with the customer. If people really are that pissed off McDonalds ice cream machines are seemingly always broken, then they should stop going to McDonalds, and then the feedback loop will start from there. It's not like there isn't ample other options (Wendys, Burger King, etc). That tells me that this "problem" is really overblown, and while McDonalds customers really would prefer to have the option to reliably order ice cream, it does not deter them significantly enough from consuming McDonalds, and doing something like simply purchasing their ice cream from a different location. If McDonalds wants to recoup that income, then they will, again, prioritize that initiative, and work on improving the ice cream machine, but again, that juice does not seem worth the squeeze.

Best Idea: companies that inflict unreliable & high-maintenance crap on the market naturally go out of business because people freely choose to no longer purchase their unreliable and high-maintenance crap.

No problem. I am also a huge Dream Theater fan.

I was doing primarily go development since it was first released up until a few years ago when the pandemic allowed me the opportunity to move into a full time remote gig doing primarily Java development, so I can answer this as I hadn't done Java at that point for over 10 years, so I felt completely new (what Java I did before that, I was mostly trying to not use Java by using play framework or jruby on rails)

As someone in the boat you mentioned (sort of) the short answer is modern Java development for 90% of tasks is not complicated at all: it's very much like any programming language used in a bizdev/corp environment -- you are mostly using a framework and a bunch of DSLs. Almost everyone uses Intellij and Gradle for IDE and build, and Junit5 or Spock for unit testing. I passed a technical interview mostly on Spring Framework concepts knowing almost nothing about it, nor having ever used it in production by simply just having the documentation open while I was being interviewed so I could look up the answers. Any language that is popular is going to have frameworks with decent documentation that help you be productive quickly, so I just jumped in doing Spring. The java stuff came as needed, or I referenced something like Effective Java (great book), or a Baeldung article. Java world has made some great strides since the 2000's and early 2010s of XML chaos. It took a while, but I feel like it's in a really good spot and getting better.

As an aside, if it hasn't been mentioned to you before, if you like simplicity in a language, but still incredibly productive, you might enjoy Go.

A very, very small portion of your taxes go directly to city services.

Well government (supposedly) exists to serve the people, why have an issue when the people decide to serve themselves? We should be encouraging it, while finding a solution that is sustainable.

Imagine if the city identified this as an issue today. It would take minimum of months to potentially years to start implement a solution.

We had an issue of too much rapid development in our town and dump trucks were littering the streets with gravel debris, making the roads unsafe (it's difficult to stop on a dime if you slide on gravel, as I unfortunately found out recently). We had a local Lions den club decide to take action and start sweeping up the gravel.

Seems like at least in the digital world, there is either public or private information, and that's it. We don't really have a good concept of privilege or protected information.

For example, my home address is technically public, but I most certainly wouldn't want it lambasted across the interstate with a picture of my family next to it advertising where I live. It's handed out on a need-to-know basis, and I mostly trust / expect that it's kept mostly confidential, or use-limited.

Do they need to be backed by evidence to be correct? What if they are just right? Do other companies not running Erlang mean its wrong? Because that's a bold argument that could be restated to disprove many things -- X technology claims to do Y well and has a track record of doing it really well, but Z companies don't use X technology, therefore...[insert whatever].

I don't believe in blindly believing things without evidence either, especially if I have never encountered them before, but I also don't believe in blindly dismissing experience of world renowned experts in their field because they didn't provide me a point by point prooftext of every claim they made (Again we aren't sitting here discussing a dissertation or mathematical proof). Their experience and what they've provided to the world is the evidence. We took this 19th century german ultra-materialist philosophy too far here in the west, and that's what gave us post modernism/poststructuralism with its disastrous consequences, but it still seems like we haven't learned anything from that.

The ancients had it right that theres different types of knowledge, and different ways of knowing things (and knowing them to be true, at least as far as it mattered). We here in the modern era with the most unfettered access to information have quite possibly the narrowest definition, ironically.

There isn't some universe where there exists a list of axiomatic, unfalisifable proofs for what or what doesn't constitute the foundations of scalability and robustness, rather, you have a tradition of development practices that have much more often lead you to scalability and robustness than than the alternatives, and Joe Armstrong was someone who trailblazed that tradition in blood sweat and tears so to speak, as well as a majority of developers here, many of which have had experience writing software that handles millions, sometimes hundreds of millions of requests per second who would very much likely agree with Joe on a lot of things.

Not everything people say on a discussion board is some scientific claim, subject to scientific inquiry and in need of a thesis defense. But if you really off-the-cuff dismiss Joe Armstrong's opinion on a matter because it hasn't met your criteria of proof, despite you thinking you are somehow being the rational scientist here, you are actually revealing your own stupidity.

There was something called gen_leader back in the day that came out of Jungerl

and an attempt to correct it by Hans Svensson: https://erlang.org/workshop/2005/NewLeaderElection.pdf

This project attempts to modernize it: https://github.com/lehoff/gen_leader

But from what I can tell, theres no standardized solution. There are quite a few libraries I can see out there, however.

The concept of judging has always included some form of bias. There is no such thing as an impartial judge. AI won't change this, it will just include a different set of biases. I'd rather be judged by a human than a machine.

I am not sure if Google has empirically gotten worse or not, but I do know that I very often have to use multiple search engines more often than not now in order to find the information I am looking for.

Very glad this topic is coming up more. It was the default living arrangement for the majority of human history, and still is for much of the world. Here in America, and for much of the industrialized west, the ideal of the nuclear family (non-coincidentally invented during the rise of industrialism) is quite frankly too narrow. With their deep protestant roots, Americans would do well to look at how families were organized in the Bible and see that the ideal of rugged individualism and nuclear family 2 1/2 kid white picket fence households clash with that greatly.

Critiques of the article:

Multigenerational is too narrow in this sense. It doesn't have to be explicitly in the same house. It could be the same household. It could be a commune, or a clan. I think its best if you pursue this you still have separate living quarters, but have dedicated common areas. Of course it may be the case that its not be feasible (space limitations), but it goes on to my next point, this article is trying to frame multigenerational housing as a solution to a problem, not to view it from a standpoint of the problems we are facing are because we moved away from multigenerational housing/local communities.

Secondly, must everything have to be viewed in such a utilitarian context? It's exhausting, quite frankly. Not everything has to be viewed as some scale of benefits, and if the scales are too unbalanced then it's somehow "unjust". Perhaps taking care of your mother is a noble thing to do, and yes, it will exhaust you, and yes you might not get out of it the measure of benefit as she is, at least materially.

I think of Wendel Berry. He writes on the decline of and importance of community and mutual shared understandings. Need to Be Whole is his latest gem.

Plug-in Hybrids are the best of all worlds, but currently ridiculously expensive. I wanted a plug in hybrid minivan, but I couldn't justify it even after the tax incentive. It should be the default engine configuration, not some "premium feature"

Mentorship is not typically paid for, and books can't interact with you.

Our society is so fractured and individualized. We think we have to offer money for everything. We used to have academic societies, social clubs, and many more communal spaces that are all a shell of their former self or just filled with the older generation that valued things like that. Our generations mantra is "I hate people". We live in large congested cities and don't truly know our neighbors. Problem stems from here. You are only a "nobody" (you're not btw, that's a lie) because you haven't bothered to become a somebody to someone.

Difficult problem to solve, for sure.

> How though? As author points out where hopelessly blind to our own wrong mental models & perceived reality

I think it's difficult, but mentorship comes to mind. For me, a really good tutor when I was at university helped me see the flaws in my mental models.

I haven't touched PCB design/EDA since college because it was so cost prohibitive and I lost the student license to Mentor Graphics, but it's something I've always wanted to return to. I am excited to try this out!

Don't forget about fermenting and pickling.

They also had cellars and natural refrigerators.

yawaramin, my former reasonML brother, you won't remember me, but I am so happy to have you comment on my comment even if it is tongue in cheek! Hope all is well.

I am in this boat as well. Our stream subscriptions are down to zero -- just the one I get for free with my cell carrier. And as for Disney and whatever the heck it is they have become, I have reverted back to purchasing purchased discs of any good movies or series.

Exactly. If you ditch the bikeshedding and no true scot arguments, REST is just a loosely defined naming convention around HTTP verbs, that almost every company I have been apart of agrees on / disagrees on certain minor aspects. That being said, I am thankful that we moved to using some form of "REST" (however you define it) as it was infinitely better than WSDL/SOAP. gRPC is nice in some areas, but these days I find myself doing what the article says more often than not -- just creating business-definition specific resources that utilize GET/POST and JSON.

I bought Tailwind UI when it first came out, and have been thrilled. I view it as essentially I paid for a high quality template to build off of. You are still expected to know tailwind, or at least that's how I took it, I am not sure how its advertised now, but I am pretty sure its not advertised as a batteries included OOTB solution, but more as a starting point. From that perspective, I have been pleased.

This is more indicative of where one chooses to spend most of their time online.

The actual best case outcome is consumers become increasingly educated on these issues and use the market to not reward Apple for these practices, rather than relying on the coercive apparatus of the state that easily falls victim to corruption and regulatory capture, until such the time where we can have an actual functioning government again that isn't strangling small businesses, close the revolving door and get money out of politics and, yeah.. pigs flying and all that.

Right.

Bait and switch: a scam to mislead buyers, whereby a seller advertises an appealing but ingenuine offer to sell a product or service that the seller does not actually intend to sell (emphasis mine)

The "digital good" is the bait. It makes you think you are purchasing ownership like you would with a physical book, or dvd, or game. The bait is effective because it tries to tie itself to the legitimate form and tries to create a false equivalency of buying a physical copy (in some cases, claiming to be "superior" because its greener or whatnot).

The solution would be for companies to be explicit in what is actually happening: you are purchasing an indefinite lease on the content subject to terms and exceptions. But I imagine they don't want to do that because it would cause a dent in their business.