thrashh

A lot of people like Apple because it was built on Jobs’ taste and they liked Jobs’ taste.

With Jobs gone, it still has a taste but it someone else’s taste.

That said, I think some people have developed their own original taste but some people’s tastes are just an amalgamation of the people around them.

I don’t have ADHD but I did the test. My answers would vary with amount of sleep:

4 hours/night - Poor executive function, can’t figure out what order to do things in, lose keys and random things, forget to lock doors and not even realize it

6 hours - Mild executive dysfunction, never sure if I locked the door but I did

8 hours - Zero problems

10 hours - I’ve never actually experimented

I agree. It doesn’t matter if you give an inexperienced person a hammer or a saw — they’ll still screw it up.

My biggest pet peeve is they NO ONE ever does failure modeling.

I swear everyone builds things assuming it will work perfectly. Then when you mention if one part fails, it will completely bring down everything, they’ll say that it’s a 1 in a million chance. Yeah, the problem isn’t that it’s unlikely, it’s that when it does happen, you’ve perfectly designed your system to destroy itself.

You know, planning isn't something that is necessarily required or necessarily not required. You plan as much as a situation demands.

Presumably in a smaller society with abundant water, you can wing your pipes because it doesn't really matter. A larger society in a desert? Well, that's way different. Inefficiencies add up too much.

The real trouble is people who just believe in strong rules when really, you should be looking at your specific situation and using your brain.

There’s very few candidates in that region for good allies so Israel has a stronghold in US politics.

If we had made Iraq a powerful ally, it would have weakened support for Israel but that whole area of the world is too embroiled in conflict.

The problems with DSLs is usually poor ass documentation.

Throwing a full programming language in place of a DSL means now you deal with everyone and their mom inventing their own way of doing things.

I grew up in the early 2000s and us and other kids in middle school were watching beheading videos and/or porn.

Shit, I talk to other functioning adults in their 20s and 30s and they tell me they too watched the same garbage.

I think you might have rose tinted glasses on to be honest. The Internet was just as wild back then.

Afaik a ton of companies use Watson.

IBM doesn’t market services… they market solutions. You contract with them and they figure out how they build something for you. And it may include Watson.

It seems a lot of people make a product but don’t use it themselves enough to tell how to make it better so it always feels like v1.

Or they do but they’re not very observant idk?

This is where experience comes in.

Someone experienced will know how much work a certain approach will take and its capacity.

Sometimes there are quick wins to give like 100x capacity to a system just by doing things slightly differently, but only with experience will you know that.

I mean you can design a filesystem to handle a million files extremely quickly... it just has to be in the requirements up front.

But there will be some trade-off.

And I don't think people generally put "a million files" in the requirements because it's fairly rare.

In this case, the limitation is more on developers of iPad apps than users. It’s making developers more creative but I don’t think it’s making users more creative.

Don't know about New York but California has lost plenty of firms over decades. Aerospace used to be all in California, for example.

But California's GDP rises faster than most states and countries in the world so it's probably good the rest of the world gets our hand-me-downs...

Even every significant website built 15 years ago not in JavaScript involved a framework. In Java, you got Spring. In Python, you got Django. In Ruby, you got RoR. In PHP, you got Symfony. etc.

Blaming frameworks seems misguided.

I mean everything has a cost but quadrupling the number of users is the benefit.

There’s no reason why an app can’t work as well either via command line or via GUI. The whole point of architecturing your software is so you don’t write something kludgy.

I mean iPhones do it purposely to make people buy iPhones. And it works.

Apple is full of marketing geniuses. They’re maybe using a lot of dark patterns but they’re raking in profit.

Tools and ecosystem really make a product. Microsoft knew this when they invested so much in tooling. Java has some of the best tool chains of any language. Macromedia and to some extent Adobe invested a lot with tooling for Flash.

Shit I even made GUIs for all my command-line tools so normal people could use them.

Not from my experience.

I’ve used Wirecutter top picks. They suck and actually do break

There’s also the Power Query add-in for Excel that’s super steezy.

It’s like a light Power BI.

Honestly even thought I can make interactive report webapps, that stuff needs to be built and maintained so I rather have people use Excel or a BI tool. Even I rather use Excel or a BI tool than write code.

That’s true but for a lot of these products, they were negative ones like “broke after a few uses.”

Super sus when Wirecutter is promoting something as a top pick.

But it also makes sense. A review site like Wirecutter is using the product like one time — they have no idea if it’s going to last.

I used to think they were good but I think they were only good on paper, even before they were bought by NYT.

I checked out a lot of their top picks and a lot of them had like 2/5 ratings after a few years and it turns out a lot of their picks weren’t really reliable or weren’t that good once you used it a lot.

I feel like Wirecutter just bought a bunch of stuff and compared things superficially.

Being truthful doesn’t mean much. Actions are worth much more than words.

What trust is seeing how a product has evolved over 5-10 years.

I think you’re missing my point. My point is focusing on whether a project is open source is relatively meaningless. It’s like using the price at a restaurant to judge the quality of food… it’s almost meaningless.

This is going to sound maybe insensitive but I've noticed driving drunk is a cultural thing. I've been with certain groups of people and pretty much it seems everyone and their cousin has a DUI and no one regarded it as a major crime.

It sounds crazy but I bet if you were born 40 years earlier, you wouldn't care. Drunk driving wasn't even a thing until Mothers Against Drunk Driving made it a thing in the 80s.

I don't support drunk driving at all but it seems our views on right and wrong are just products of society, lol.

With all due respect, a project being open source means nothing for trust. There's a litany of open source projects that I have used that have been completely abandoned.

Trust comes from building a healthy ecosystem of users, which ultimately comes from building a good product.

Web dev frontend has a thousand quirks but has a billion more hours of human hours development time spent on it. CSS is annoying but way better than trying to jiggle random attributes and subclassing stock components to do something basic like right align a label.

You'll notice that a lot of GUI toolkits have already adopted something like CSS (Qt Style Sheets, JavaFX CSS, etc.). Yet they will never become as good, just because there are much fewer people working on it.

It’s because if you want to continue getting a job, you want to use what other people are using.

Using most static page frameworks is like using ColdFusion for your career advancement.

Well when you value low effort content and high effort content equally, you discourage people from making high effort content when they can make money by just recording their roof.

Not at all. You don't have to describe anything when throwing an error because that's the point of exception inheritance. Second, the whole point of exceptions is to bubble them out of the handler(!) because otherwise you would use return values (like in Go).

Since you are saying that you have to describe the problem within the error object, it sounds like you must be you are parsing error messages and stack traces to figure out what the error is. That's not how exceptions are to be used and I think that's why you are not seeing why you would bubble errors.

In other languages, you don't have to do any of that nonsense because object identity is much stronger, but JavaScript uses prototypical inheritance so you can't really tell if an error is an ImageError or an IOError. Despite this issue, exceptions were added to the JavaScript language without resolving that problem. The reason why you have to worry about frameworks eliminating error information is because that problem wasn't resolved and so frameworks roll their own error handling and there is no standard.

What language would that be?

I've programmed in Java, Python, C, C#, TypeScript, VHDL, and some other languages and they all fucking suck in some way.

If it was up to me, I would pick the best parts of the languages/ecosystems and make a Frankenstein language.

And anyway in the end, it's never the language. It's the ecosystem. Just because you can run Java on .NET doesn't mean you should -- because almost no one else does it your way and it's not worth the trouble maintaining some weird approach very few people use. You're never going to get help from library authors when it doesn't work on your weird setup.

Disagree.

Usually you don't need to just know if there is an error or not -- sometimes you need to know what that error is. For example, an I/O error versus your image-is-too-small error -- you need to respond to the user differently. I've seen plenty of web apps that treat I/O errors and user input errors as a generic "an error happened" and that is completely wrong. Proper exception bubbling means none of that code that encounters the errors needs to necessarily know how to handle the error and your app always responds correctly.

That said, I don't use exceptions as much in JS because exception handling in JS is still very nascent. There's no base library of exceptions and telling different exceptions apart is not built-in to the language. In a language with more mature exception handling, it's a breeze.