HN user
awesome things like making it illegal to sell Word and therefore Office
How about just making your open source alternative to Word and Office that much better and competing with them?
* edit: downmodded without justification. Wonderful. Which just forces the quality of discussion on HN WAY down. Ironically, understanding that concept requires understanding incentives, which are the basis of patents in the first place :)
"I had in mind that all things being otherwise equal and being occupied with more or less the same stuff for the duration of the existence of said list."
Fair enough.
"And I don't play the lottery ;)"
Nor do I; 'twas just a thought experiment :)
I don't think this is the criterion you want - if I won the lottery, for example, my to-do list would explode with all the new possibilities presented before me; however, if that happened, I certainly wouldn't consider it a bad day. :)
""This does not work"? It works for me."
Inheriting money might make someone a millionaire - that doesn't make "Have a rich uncle" a viable financial plan. "Having a rich uncle" therefore "does not work". The same goes for making a simple list of your three goals for the day - for 99% of people, it just doesn't work because your simple plan is most likely going to be blown to hell by some emergency/meeting/new project that just landed on your plate. I believe you when you say that it works for you, but it just doesn't work for the vast majority of people.
" i think you missed the joke about being productive and not achieving anything"
I got the joke - you almost certainly meant that someone who is "being productive and not achieving anything" is engaging in busywork but not doing anything worthwhile, which would mean that they are active (i.e. they are not procrastinating), but they are not properly prioritizing the actions they take. I covered that case explicitly.
"Honestly if you were to work like this you may as well work for a big corporation where you can save yourself the hassle of having to audit your time – as some jerk of a manager will do it for you."
Your managers have other crap to do than to watch what you're doing 24/7 (or "8/5" for that matter) - they're much more likely to just hand you something so they can get it off their own plate and just expect you to handle it.
" You’ll end up spending your entire day “being productive” without actually achieving anything."
"Being productive" == achieving things. If you're not achieving something, you're not being productive (either because you're not doing anything [procrastination] or because you are doing the wrong things [i.e. your priorities are not set properly])
"Rather than this stupid auditing crap, come up with 3 tasks that are most important to your success. Do each one first thing in the day (my day is backwards btw, as in my day starts at around 9pm at night, im a bit wierd). Take a break in between each task and then feel free to procrastinate after."
This DOES NOT WORK. The only case in which this is a viable strategy is if you work for yourself and have no hard deadlines and you just want to keep yourself from reading reddit all day long - it doesn't work in most real-world situations. Like for example, your boss puts another project on your plate. But that never happens...
Take the advice of the late Randy Pausch - keep a time journal [http://www.scribd.com/doc/2519267/Time-Log-Sheet], and REVIEW that data (the data is useless if you just fill out time journals and let them sit in some folder somewhere).
Are they crazy? They could have made an awful movie with that money!
Taking out the trash is not intrinsically pleasurable, like playing Call of Duty, or masturbating. Or masturbating while playing Call of Duty. You take out the trash, study instead of playing games, or save your money for the longer-term effects, which is precisely my point. Saving money sucks in the short term, which by "Hedonistic GTD" would disqualify it for almost everyone.
The article is pretty much contentless fluff, and would be made 100x better if it was just replaced with the quote "do what you love and the money will follow." Still debatable, but at least it has brevity going for it.
"Arrange your life around what you like. That’s it! You’re done. You’ll be happy forever."
Who would have thought that heroin addicts had the secret of life?
Not everything is pleasurable - sometimes you just have to suck it up and take out the f*cking trash. :P
I know what a screen reader simulation is - perhaps you should google "joke."
This has inspired me to launch my own service. Here is how your site looks to someone that is just plain blind:
or it's all part of some grand scheme...
If the customers act honestly and do pay exactly what they would pay if the manufacturer had set the prices
I think you should be more explicit in step two.
http://blog.stackoverflow.com/wp-content/uploads/then-a-mira...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Dominique_Bauby
This man wrote a fucking BOOK by BLINKING HIS LEFT EYE.
After reading his story, you might find it easier to do your homework.
You might argue that employment is optional, but this is not the case in practice especially if you have a family to support.
OK so let's engage in a thought experiment - we make employment optional, so you don't have to work even if you have a family to support. But now, in order to get the resources to support your family, you have to force someone else to do something they don't want to do.
So protecting you from the "slavery" of employment necessarily implies some degree of slavery for some third party, because the resources needed to support your family don't come from nowhere. That's really not fair to the third party, don't you think?
and saying "there aren't enough [insert gender/race/other meaningless criterion] in here, so let's add some" is a great way to be full of shit.
MacGuyver is pleased.
OK how about this for a name - "Data Without Borders"?
or maybe the Lewinsky Club ("I'm going to say this again: we DO NOT have relations.")
I dunno about a name, but how about this for a slogan - "You can sign up, but don't ever JOIN."
But you should see how clean and maintainable the code is.
Eric Sink, author of a competing non-distributed version control system?
yeah he's only interested in promoting Vault. Except he didn't mention Vault at all during that exchange on DVCS - he only mentioned Subversion as an alternative non-distributed version control system, and he said that DVCS systems were definitely going to be the norm in the future. So, uh, no. :)
I'm pretty sure you just made that up.
Sorry, I'm going to go with Eric Sink's opinion on this over yours (nothing personal). It seems pretty obvious to me that subversion's program model is way closer to the naive user model than git's is. And yes, that is an advantage, since the user has explicitly stated that he is an absolute beginner to source control.
Once you've grokked it, yes, it's simple, but if you're managing your own system on your laptop, for instance, it is a bit of a leap to wonder why you have to install the server in one place and work in another, etc.
He doesn't need to do that at all - for example, if he's running a windows machine, he can just install TortoiseSVN and set up repositories on his local machine. Dead simple.
It's not that it's hard, it's that it's harder than git.
I'm pretty sure you just made that up.
I like how you chopped off the "and even then, the only 'savings' is you don't have to stage first" part of my statement about working with only one branch.
Because it's false - the "only savings" an absolute beginning user gets is that it is much easier to grok than git if you're new to source control.
Sorry, but this will have to end here - this is getting pretty inane. If you feel that git is obviously much easier than SVN for an absolute beginner, fire of an email to Eric Sink and argue with him.
Why do you think subversion is easier to start with?
the program model of a system like subversion pretty much == the user model for source control for someone who is new to source control. Hence, easy to start with.
You have to understand the difference between the local copy and the repository
Which is about as hard as understanding the difference between "your wallet" and "the bank."
And I personally don't think the day-to-day use is any easier, either, unless you're only working with one branch
Which he would be almost all of the time, and when he comes to grok version control pretty well (as stated) he could certainly move on to something like git.
shrug Eric Sink said it himself: "DVCS's and git are conceptually much harder than tools like Subversion"
personally, I agree with him, and given that the issue at hand is "what should this guy start out with to gain the habit of using version control" and not "what is the most awesome version control system ever where you could just imagine a merge and it does it for you while you're on an airplane using a hand-cranked One Laptop Per Child", I think conceptual ease is what we're really going for here.
Start with svn or mercurial to get a feel for what it's all about. You can always step up to git when they don't cut it anymore.
exactly - if he starts out with something like git, he's probably going to burn out and have a bad impression of source control, which doesn't help anybody.
Sweet jumping jesus YES.
And don't start withi git - start with subversion, and move on to git or mercurial later. Subversion is much easier to start out with.
Yep, tried it and it works. So if anyone else ran into the same problem, just select all the cases you want to move as described above, then click the context menu button and select "Edit" and you can change the properties for a bunch of cases at once. Pretty sweet indeed.
Thanks for the tip :)
my favorite feature in the new version of Fogbugz. the only issue I've ever had with it is that if you enter in your parent case and subcases but then find that they are accidentally under the wrong project, the only way (AFAIK) to move the entire case tree is to click on each individual case and move them all one by one. Other than that, I must say it's pretty sweet.
you need:
1) less text (as others have mentioned)
and 2) a punchline. Perhaps involving a scenario where the programmer tells the boss that he's using SQL in Excel, causing the boss to irrationally fear that powerful programs are breeding with each other (from which the only logical conclusion is Skynet), and he starts making preparations for an apocalypse-grade bunker while the programmer is trying to reassure him that it's merely some awesome product that will blow his wig off when he buys a copy.
In my humble opinion, you need to have some sort of engaging scenario that will keep people reading through the pitch, and then you need to pay off with a punchline.
I believe "daemon" is pronounced "dee-mon", not "day-mon".
http://www.merriam-webster.com/cgi-bin/audio.pl?demon001=dae...
Still funny though.
A valid point, however not providing such a control group in this case would mean that you're simply assuming that your definition of 'decent and fair payment' is accurate, which is quite a large assumption.