79 karma · joined March 29, 2010
@jonsmock
For those interested, Aaron Patterson (tenderlove) talks about this in his RailsConf talk, starting at 26:45.
The hole here is whether or not they unknowingly got a new influx of traffic that was 5% more likely to convert, skewing his final observation, which I would say is unlikely. Your point is good in general, however.
I completely agree with all the arguments, except possibly that we should never use hacks. We used (and still use) hacks on the web for desktop use when browsers sucked, and we'll do it on mobile devices, too. It's the way the state-of-the-art is pushed forward; it's inevitable. I think he would agree with me, seeing that he pointed out Scrollability's use on the iPad being somewhat valid. That said, the author's underlying point examines why we use those hacks and to evaluate whether we're solving a non-existent problem.
Edit: I might clarify my hacks point. The reason they're inevitable is that they sometimes expose browser deficiencies. A current example would be web sockets. We've been using comet-type hacks in lieu of a real web socket solution (and Chrome has now implemented one).
This may be semantics at some level, but I think it's important to not imply you just don't care about the quality of your code. Prototyping intentionally sacrifices some quality to prove a point quickly, but once the point is proven, you throw it away and rewrite with your normal, high standards.
Most families have a TV, and just about every TV you can purchase these days has HDMI. I'm incredibly sad when my teacher friends describe how few of their students have computers at home to do their work.
Not saying it's not a possibility, just saying there are advantages in not offering a one-time donation. If you still want to give, I'm sure he would accommodate you, if you contact him (he's very friendly).
And, again, I absolutely love CoffeeScript and support it 100%. I'm less infatuated with HAML and SASS, but it may simply be that I haven't used them enough. SASS in particular looks very useful.
Regardless, I agree with DHH's tweet yesterday [1] that Rails is a curated set of ideas/technologies. Pretty much by definition it's not one-size-fits-all. I think this is the first time I've found myself on the opposite side of a Rails technology switch decision, which is pretty amazing. I'm looking forward to giving it a chance, and I can always switch back, if it doesn't work out.
I like CoffeeScript, and it does feel Rubyesque, but I just don't support it being the default.
That said, I'm sure a core member will post about the decision, and I almost hope they convince me otherwise. I do really like CoffeeScript, and patio11's comment about HAML/SASS is a good one.
It's cool to celebrate "small" contributions to OS projects, because it will encourage more to do the same. But, I'd write up a bit more explaining that, especially for HN.
I didn't retweet and felt a bit guilty. I didn't want to be used either.
If Thingist could automatically categorize my updates, but have a way for me to re-organize them, that'd be ideal. Seems like a decent amount of people fall into your same use case, where they tweet quotes, songs, videos, etc. Some of these would be easier to detect than others, but it's somewhat doable.
This seems some like weird cross section between Twitter, Tumblr, and delicious to me.
Perhaps give your employees stock or the responsibility of making decisions in their specialty areas. Or, give them something like 20% time where they can be creative. Perhaps they'll create some beautiful, original woodwork that gets you press on your blog. Or, perhaps, it just enriches their lives and keeps them happy.
The other annoyance about advertising is the interruption, which I'm not sure will go away.
http://elementary-project.com/news/what-is-elementary-and-wh...
EDIT: still digging. Here's another interesting post:
"We mean that we want to be the first to offer a desktop OS that doesn’t include any way for the user to manage files. ... We think that files should be accessed from the applications that the user will use them in."
http://elementary-project.com/news/just-do/
Later, however, they talk about adding Nautilus (a file browser) and somehow adapting to adhere with the above philosophy.
I think I've identified a few causes: 1. Design by committee 2. Winners are determined by relationships and lock-in 3. Educators don't care about finding the best, just good enough 4. Great developers don't want to work in this sector
The first should be obvious. Anything run by government tends towards design by committee, and educational software almost tries to be bad in this way.
The second is true of other sectors, but it is especially true in education. Intermediate Units (I work in PA) and school districts don't try to work together by default. Even at the top, deals are done by who knows who or who hates who. And, the enormous cost of switching products for the large systems creates a lock-in environment. People will say/promise anything to get a sale, because they know they will really have to screw up to lose customers.
Third, educators as a rule are afraid of technology or are at least more unaware than anyone here on HN. They don't want to spend the time to learn; they want to spend whatever it takes to get the problem off their plate. Remember, there are a great deal of people who went into education because of the vacation time. Some people really care and work hard, but the percentage is lower than other industries, I think.
Finally, for all the reasons above, the greatest developers don't want to work in education. The bosses are almost never developers; winners aren't determined by quality; most code is CRUD type code with lots of rules and exceptions from state law/procedure.
I get excited at the thought of change, which is why I stay. I want to be part of that change. But, on the low days change seems impossible, and I start thinking about other jobs.
One side note: why isn't there more OS in education? This really bothers me, as it seems like a perfect scenario for it. I'm thinking it goes back to points #2 and #3. People want to pay for something now rather than funding something everyone shares. If I could be part of the change in one way, this would be it (I'm looking for ways now).
EDIT: One more: pay. Because most code is crud code, and because bosses aren't developers who can discern good from bad code, the perception is developers should be paid like teachers (or worse). Not going to attract the great developers that way. In the long run, all these software costs more to develop as a result of not hiring the best, but non-developer bosses can't understand that.
If I read this right, you're struggling to feel needed. I know this isn't exactly the same thing as the need to make a difference in the world, but it seems close enough to be actionable.
I say find some people who truly need you and do your best to help them. Is that teaching? Is that fixing their situation? Is that creating a new idea or product? This will take some exploration, but it has to be worth it, right?
And, none of us are perfect. I put the same pressure on myself (I've been programming since 7th grade, and I feel the exact same way about my questionable programming skills). But, we're all still learning, and I'm betting you're smart enough to make a difference in at least one person's life. Then you can extrapolate from there.