spiderjerusalem

Popper and Feyerabend are incompatible though. Feyerabend explicitly critiqued Popper.

> Again, spending time with people in a social environment is a meaningful thing to do with one's life.

Totally agree on that one, but I would rather that social environment is not overlapping with all sorts of economic power dynamics. I would much rather hang out at cafes and public places and spend time outside economic contexts based on shared interests such as literature, art, music etc.

This can be amortized though. You spend one good weekend setting things up to your liking and dump your dotfiles and other config properly in a git repo and you don't have to do it every single time.

A one time xmonad + arch setup that I did a couple of years ago has lasted me across 3 machines with only minor tweaking.

I always use :bow:.

Eh, more often than not, it's pretty clear who at least one of the authors of the paper is by just looking at what they cite. Double blind review is not a foolproof system of avoiding creds and appeals to authority.

I'm not saying there are no young people doing sysadmin. What I'm trying to say is that if the new 'infrastructure' that all sysadmins learn is not an open UNIXy system where you can grok all the internals if you want to, but closed systems owned by 2-3 major cloud players, then we kinda maybe have a problem in 20 years?

Of course, one can argue that that will just cause a new wave of openness and the cycle continues.

What fascinates me about this is, and sorry for being morbid, but what happens when y'all die? Does knowledge of the lower levels of the stack go away with your generation, or will there be enough of us young ones picking the important stuff up?

FWIW, I just setup a sweet Arch + Xmonad rice on my MBP mid-2012 and it's working really, really well. Almost negligible footprint (<200 MB for sure, with a few background daemons). Arch has truly been a breath of fresh air. Every package that I installed has a reason. No cruft.

sauce?

I don't know many STEM type people apart from me who are into such things honestly, so your claim is very interesting to me. Do you know someone with an online presence (blog for instance) who would fit into the category?

I've been fascinated with occult/esoteric stuff lately, so I want to add one more quote there.

That which is below is like that which is above & that which is above is like that which is below. - The Emerald Tablet

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emerald_Tablet#Newton.27s_tran...

Fame does not bode well for some archetypes. Some of us are really better off actively avoiding the spotlight.

Any oldies here who can recount why exactly Hypercard was killed? Seems like such a wonderful piece of software.

Vienna is wonderful :)

Amen. Somehow a lot of comments in this thread are blinded to the fact that the 'commons' are not simply subsumed within the 'market'. The logic of commons is quite orthogonal to that of markets.

Use Debian stretch

Textbook MBAs man. Hate them. All the fluff talk of innovation, but no sign of even an iota of critical thought.

I keep trying to push the boundaries outwards in negotiations though, trying to find their breaking points. Often, it surprises me how much I'm able to get away with.

The samizdat of our times might just be about _actually_ working while wading through seas full of these creatures.

> And any time you allow mutability in any form ...

Odersky often says that the mutability should be as 'contained' as possible in what is otherwise a largely immutable codebase. If you can reason cleanly about a black box and are sure that the mutable variables within are not going to 'escape', you get the benefits of both

1. easier to implement, imperative algos which have been around for decades. (the alternative in pure FP is to convert stuff to tail recursion, which is not always the easiest thing to do, let's just say.)

2. easier reasoning about state not leaking to the rest of the system.

I've found following these guidelines to be very helpful.

I'm curious now, because this is very close to how I see pomo and I always find myself in distress trying to express this to hardcore STEM-my people (I was one myself, but nowadays thoughts are much too layered for just that.)

Anyway, the thing I'm curious about, have you read House of Leaves? I always explain the book to people as something that exploded my senses of (traditional) scientific certainty and then I went on a huge voyage of pomo, Wittgenstein etc. It also showed me in an intensely terrifying way how fluid in concept my mind could be, something like 'The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me (Pascal)'.

Remote US only?

Why?

| but it's worth reminding that the effective income tax for the lowest 20-40% of earners is negative

Can you explain why this is so? Interesting way to put it..