Exactly. And to the critics in this thread, a thing is not necessarily faulty because you fail to understand it.
1,672 karma · joined May 24, 2016
contract WETH9 {
string public name = "Wrapped Ether";
string public symbol = "WETH";
uint8 public decimals = 18;
event Approval(address indexed src, address indexed guy, uint wad);
event Transfer(address indexed src, address indexed dst, uint wad);
event Deposit(address indexed dst, uint wad);
event Withdrawal(address indexed src, uint wad);
mapping (address => uint) public balanceOf;
mapping (address => mapping (address => uint)) public allowance;
function() public payable {
deposit();
}
function deposit() public payable {
balanceOf[msg.sender] += msg.value;
Deposit(msg.sender, msg.value);
}
function withdraw(uint wad) public {
require(balanceOf[msg.sender] >= wad);
balanceOf[msg.sender] -= wad;
msg.sender.transfer(wad);
Withdrawal(msg.sender, wad);
}
function totalSupply() public view returns (uint) {
return this.balance;
}
function approve(address guy, uint wad) public returns (bool) {
allowance[msg.sender][guy] = wad;
Approval(msg.sender, guy, wad);
return true;
}
function transfer(address dst, uint wad) public returns (bool) {
return transferFrom(msg.sender, dst, wad);
}
function transferFrom(address src, address dst, uint wad)
public
returns (bool)
{
require(balanceOf[src] >= wad);
if (src != msg.sender && allowance[src][msg.sender] != uint(-1)) {
require(allowance[src][msg.sender] >= wad);
allowance[src][msg.sender] -= wad;
}
balanceOf[src] -= wad;
balanceOf[dst] += wad;
Transfer(src, dst, wad);
return true;
}
}But here's a 2022 challenge for everyone: Start something new and get your first paying customer. You have exactly 1 month from now. I look forward to your Show HN.
Or, he just likes to share knowledge for free, some people still find joy in that, fortunately.
Then there's that cliche of how you learn more (or cementing your knowledge) by teaching. Sometimes that's all the motivation I need.
That's more or less true regardless if you're soloing a project or on a team. Depending on the design. It's true, you do sometimes, for a period of time, have to keep several things in your head at the same time, but how the code base, class, function, or whatever, is structured, can increase or lessen this cognitive load. There's many ways to skin this cat. Generally you shouldn't have to keep more in your head than the current module. It's all about encapsulation. Do you need to understand just the interface, or the implementation as well? That's your choice, as far as how you design your codebase, since you're a solo dev.
Really? You have found several life-long friends at parties? How old are you? What's your definition of 'friend' in this case? How good of a friend are we talking?
Most of your friends and acquaintances are not relationships formed at educational institutions or workplaces?
First, you have to be at least 40+ to even begin deeming a relationship "life-long", even then it's somewhat hyperbole. Very few of my friends have even struck up 1 such relationship from such events. I think it's rare. Purely anecdotal of course, looking at the people in my own life and that of my friends'.
> This is a skill you can learn. It's a skill with tacit knowledge requiring real-world practice in order to develop it. There are also entire books, blog posts, etc. written on it, if you care.
Wait, let me get this right. What exactly are you saying is a skill one can learn? Meeting life-long friends at parties? Are you talking about manipulation? Exploitation? "How to win friends and influence people?"
Bullshit like presenting not your true self, but a likable facade in order to please other people and meet social expectations?
Might be a framing device, yes.
> I personally agree with the gp that "I'd rather read a book than go to a party" indicates room for improvement in social skills.
I think that's reaching again. That might just be a personal preference, "I enjoy reading more than socializing." Is this not a valid opinion to have? One can also occasionally do both (not at the same time) but still prefer one over the other if given the choice.
> A skilled communicator can transition from small talk to more complex/interesting topics when talking with a stranger.
The author's problem wasn't that he couldn't engage in conversations about "complex" or interesting topics, it was particularly about the topics that were of interest to him. No matter your communication skills, you won't be able to strike up a meaningful conversation with just anyone on HAIFA constructions and their properties.
> Most books are about people, right? How do you suspect the authors came up with all the interesting characters? You can find interesting characters in real life too, it just takes a different skillset from reading.
Not sure how you came to the conclusion that uninteresting topics at parties equal uninteresting characters, either way, I think this is way outside the scope of the discussion. Neither OP nor the person you're replying to (me) has even hinted at this.
> Neither I nor the GP (I think) are trying to say that poor social skills is an insult to character.
I'm not so sure about that. GP practically called lack of social skills a deficiency and he wrote about hardly anything but character.
> That doesn't mean you can't practice and get better at it.
Again, outside the scope of the discussion, at least as a response to my comments and the author's article.
But, I will respond all the same, because it irks me. First, it's a truism. Second, it feels like your premise is that one should be good at it? Should everyone strive to be better at socializing?
I think no. Those who enjoy socializing should keep their skills sharp and probably work to improve them; because to them, the act of socializing is a rewarding one.
If you do not innately enjoy it, it's highly unlikely you ever will, and why should you even strive to want this? For what purpose? No, if you do not enjoy socializing, spend as little time on it as possible. Spend time on what's rewarding to you.
If staying at home reading books is it, then that's absolutely fine.
Unfortunately, there is this inane pressure in society to be sociable, appealing, and likable. To be such a person, to be liked in the office at that level, or at parties, or worse, in social media, is even equated with success.
None of my "heroes" are or were likable. They were difficult people who obsessed about their work, it took nearly all their time, in some cases the sacrifices were huge, family time, the family itself, and even procreation was sometimes sacrificed, but damn, these people laid the foundation for modern civilization and technology.
This is what all of humanity should strive for. Valuable contributions. Do you know how all those people made those contributions?
By spending inordinate amounts of time by themselves. Absorbed.
Don't sell yourself so short. These are vast disciplines where a multitude of people with diverse skillsets can make valuable contributions.
> Having consumed a 500 page book does not make you more intellectual than having consumed 500 episodes of Coronation Street. Consumption, in general, is a low hanging fruit, intellectually. Your love for Doctor Who doesn't make you smarter than someone's fanning over Rihanna.
> Intellectuals are rarely lonely. Because true intellectuals see value in information, no matter the sender or matter. Restrictive topic selection is pretty much the definition of anti-intellectualism, in my opinion.
Big red flag anytime anyone prefixes something with "true." First you stubbornly deny what an intellectual is, then you redefine its meaning to suit your narrative, with your "true intellectual."
A friendly tip, spend less time "on the internet" and more time deep-diving into a narrow topic that interests you, do R&D, create. I find that many who spend much time "on the internet" simply consume and never create.
Einstein would perhaps have achieved nothing if he had the Internet, he was too curious, would perhaps have wasted all his time jumping from rabbit hole to rabbit hole. Unless, he chose to focus on his research, and kept web browsing to a minimum.
The Internet should be used more like a research tool than a time-killing device. It doesn't matter the topic of the articles you read, no matter the complexity and technical depth of the information you consume if you never do anything with it. If it never amounts to anything.
Even writing this comment, I can feel the waste of time it is, or any other comment. I recognize it for what it is, and try to spend very little time on such activities.
Checking my recent comment history, I can see that fortunately I seem to have it under control, with two weeks time between my days of commenting.
> Part of me wonders if the OP were to meet one of the authors of the books he reads at a party, would he be able to interact with them? Probably not
> You’re going to go to a lot of parties in life, if you give up on them
Why do you have this incessant need to make assumptions about the author and generalize?
You're also placing tremendous importance on socializing and parties. This is not something that's of importance or even relevance for many intellectuals and introverts. Most parties consist of unrewarding, mundane chit-chat, easily forgotten. Going to parties in the hopes of finding a new "life long friend" or "beneficial relationship" is like playing the lottery.
Also, if you're going to place that much importance on parties, you need to define what kind of parties, then we can address those discretely. Company events? Parties with friends? Relatives? Conferences? Burning man?
We have that in Norway, hjemmebrent, we just call it 9 6 (96%), aka moonshine.
Wow, a thread about supply chains and you manage to take a cheap jab at Linux. In response, try running Windows on a computer you only use once a month. You can watch it update every time instead of getting work done. Linux you can update while working.