The constant use of metaphor and simile drove me crazy. I had suspected this might be AI due to the frequency as well as absurdity of some of the comparisons (Talmudic scholars? Renaissance cardinals??) but humans also write dumb things like this that make them feel smart more than they serve rhetorical purpose. Or so I think.
I mean just look at this. I didn't even need to look through more than a few paragraphs to find:
> But the subscription traps are where the real extraction occurs—and here we encounter the kind of business model innovation that would make a mobster tip his hat in professional admiration. Customers complain of being locked into year-long commitments they can't escape, like hotel California but with erectile dysfunction pills. Better Business Bureau complaints reveal the pattern with the reliability of a Swiss timepiece: ... Picture ordering a 3-month hair loss kit only to find Hims has shipped and charged for a fourth without consent, like a pharmaceutical version of that friend who keeps ordering shots when you've already said you're driving.
BTW, where's the referral URL you speak of? I didn't realize there was a smoking gun.
That's kind of a weird point to make. I don't see why it would be a universal truth that a good programmer is someone who invests in their tools.
I could just as easily say that good programmers are the ones who don't have sophisticated tooling setups because it means that they spend more time programming.
I'm inclined to agree with other comments that the baseline for productivity is probably lower than we think. It's fine to enjoy the process of making a perfect setup, but I don't see it as a prerequisite or strong indicator for being a strong programmer.
> I don't see why it would be a universal truth that a good programmer is someone who invests in their tools.
I have never said that. However, since you decided to go that direction. I can bite and entertain you. Here is a list of programmers, some of them I'm sure you'd even recognize. Donald Knuth, Rob Pike, Ken Thompson, Steve Yegge, Gary Bernhardt, Paul Graham, Rich Hickey, Bram Moolenaar, Richard Stallman, Anders Hejlsberg, Guido van Rossum, John Carmack, Tim Pope, Drew Neil, Sindre Sorhus, TJ Holowaychuk, Guillermo Rauch, Ryan Dahl, Fabrice Bellard.
The pattern is clear: many of the best programmers are also prolific tool-builders.
I don't even understand what point you are making. The essence of programming is tool making. Of course the best programmers make tools as do the worst. Are you seriously comparing making a terminal hot rod configuration app to, say, creating Tex?
> Being a programmer is not about configuring your development environment.
My point is that being a programmer is also about configuring one's development environment. Exactly because like you said: "the essence of programming is tool making". I just don't understand how it is different - configuring a tool, extending its functionality, adding more features to it from developing a [different] tool from scratch? Both is programming. Shit done by programmers. You don't call one bunch "pseudo-programmers" and the other "alpha-programmers" or some shit like that, right?
Then I misunderstood your comment. I read it as "not invested in their tools => not a good programmer."
Reading the replies to my sibling comments, I don't think we really disagree but we probably have different pictures in our heads when reading the context of this thread.
I wouldn't be too surprised if PL proofs were simpler to start with. Part of what I hear people say is that they also are a lot more routine. Do structural induction, apply the IH to show an invariant holds, continue. I haven't done much theorem proving, nor have I done any "mathematical" (e.g. analysis) proofs with a theorem prover, but it makes me wonder how much skill transfer there is between them if "mathematical" proofs require a much different approach.
I will also mention Software Foundations in Rocq (perhaps there is a Lean port). I worked through some of the first parts of it and found it quite pleasant.
Kevin Buzzard said something like the PL proofs are about deep structures on simple objects (mostly integers), while modern math mainly concerns complex objects. If you already have the definitions, the properties usually don't involve a lot of recursion and case analyses.
Those who recall cars with fm radios and gsm phones will have heard something similar if their car had a random compartment right below the stereo.
When a call came in, before the phone would ring, the radio would emit this very clear tri di di dit dah dah. But only when the phone was very near the radio.
Yes kinda, I would say network activity rather then traffic. Audio signal is going to be in scale of 48Khz while measuring ethernet signal at scale of 100Mhz. At that rate it wouldn't even get more then 1 sample from a full size packet. So really it's polling 48Khz whether or not there was activity during that period. The gimmick is that it uses some analog components. Fully digital you could craft a meaningful audio signal that represents traffic.
It's a weird coincidence to see this post since I only occasionally remember about Hook Theory and binge it, but I remembered earlier this week.
Many of you have probably heard the Axis of Awesome four chords song (if not, look it up, it's great), but it's fun doing the same thing with other songs.
Like, did you know that you can sing the chorus of Numb by Linkin Park over the chorus of...
* I Hate Everything About You by Three Days Grace
* Immortals by Fallout Boy
* Cheap Thrills by Sia (swung Numb lol)
(+ the bridge of The Rock Show by Blink 182)
Numb has a pretty common chord progression so I could pick songs with the exact same chords, but there are also some oddly specific finds like this video game (?) song that inexplicably has the same relative chord progression as Hotel California https://www.hooktheory.com/theorytab/view/zun/reincarnation#...
However when you put that query into the normal search box, it does match a lot more songs, showing that there is a i III _ VII trend, just that i III vi VII is strange (which I guess makes sense). Perhaps my lack of music theory makes it harder to normalize my queries, but it's also possible that (1) there isn't enough data or (2) there is inconsistency in how people annotate the pieces (some songs will have II II II II, for example, following the rhythm, whereas some songs will have just a single II).
The mikefive is my dream work keyboard. It's two keys extra from what I have currently but I know I can find something to do with the extra cluster keys
Another happy doom user (and formerly unhappy vim configure-er).
Although the objection I see is more like "Why bother learning to use emacs/vim when VSCode is free and does everything I care about and my friends use it?" Which, to be fair, the emacs/vim learning curve isn't for everyone. I sometimes wish they had less "leet programmer" cred, though, since what is cred to the leet programmer is (in this case at least) stigma to the majority.
Your comparison hits home for me. I have been playing guitar on-and-off for over a decade (OK, maybe more like trying to play guitar) and I still really enjoy Guitar Hero.
It's instant gratification: I don't have as much fun practicing at .75x speed with a metronome to learn the hard part of a piece. Instead a video game tells me how great I am at "guitar" by being able to push buttons and strum on the beat, not to mention that I hear the sounds of my favorite songs come out when I do it.
For a similar reason, I like Rocksmith (guitar hero but with a real guitar), but the gratification is not quite so instant. They gamify the practicing part but I still need to do it, otherwise the part I'm playing actually sounds bad. And sight-reading is so much harder when there are more than 5 buttons.
I can totally relate to the "deep and often weird attachments" you forge listening to albums, although I'm not sure I agree that there's a case to be made for it. A few weeks ago, I heard a song in a random gelato shop in Italy that instantly sent me back 15 years. To my knowledge, its band only had one hit (at least if we go by airplay), and this was decidedly not it. Yet I knew it well because I tend to listen to whole albums and this song was on the album with their one hit. After the high of hearing an obscure alt rock song in the strangest of places passed, it dawned on me that I didn't like that song now. Nor had I fifteen years ago.
I still listen to albums in their entirety, but I have to wonder how much exactly we lose by having the choice to only take what we like from them (without buying them in their entirety). In defense of the author, I will say that listening to the same song you don't like much enough times can make you at least tolerate it. Perhaps having all of the music of the world at my fingertips has just made me pickier, not necessarily happier.
The song in question, by the way, was "Time Won't Let Me Go" by The Bravery.
Well this is exactly why Apple iPod and iTunes became popular so quickly. A lot of bands and record labels were pumping out albums with one or two good songs and the rest garbage filler, so customers felt cheated when they paid $16 for a physical CD. With iTunes they could buy just the good songs for $1 each. Some artists and pretentious music critics whined about listeners missing out on the whole album experience but there was no going back.
I can totally relate to that, what a hit of nostalgia. I don't know if I ever bought an album on iTunes.
It's interesting how the streaming era has brought the whole album experience back. I only started listening to full albums again once I switched to streaming. Although I'm not sure how many people are taking advantage of it (for the exact reasons we both mention).
I mean just look at this. I didn't even need to look through more than a few paragraphs to find:
> But the subscription traps are where the real extraction occurs—and here we encounter the kind of business model innovation that would make a mobster tip his hat in professional admiration. Customers complain of being locked into year-long commitments they can't escape, like hotel California but with erectile dysfunction pills. Better Business Bureau complaints reveal the pattern with the reliability of a Swiss timepiece: ... Picture ordering a 3-month hair loss kit only to find Hims has shipped and charged for a fourth without consent, like a pharmaceutical version of that friend who keeps ordering shots when you've already said you're driving.
BTW, where's the referral URL you speak of? I didn't realize there was a smoking gun.
reply