luddypants

Can you elaborate on what you find disturbing? The implication of high failure rate, or the shift of focus to reliability?

Why is doing one thing a qualification for a good piece of software? I could see that some users may prefer this model of tools, but I use plenty of good software that provides a more complete solution than just doing one thing.

And then skip ahead and read chapter 10: git internals. This was really helpful for me to understand the fundamental concepts of git and why it is designed the way it is.

This has no been the case historically, I'm not sure why it would be now. Why would ms invest in languages like vb.net and f# if so? Choice of languages that target the CLR has always been a selling point even though c# is dominant.

I don't think the fps calculation is quite accurate, I was getting close to 60 fps and seeing lots of jerks.

$100 more for 2x RAM and storage, that doesn't seem like a "ridiculous premium". Unless you mean ridiculous in some other way than the actual dollar amount.

The point was probably that this is not scientific. Whatever model you come up with won't really have any predictive power. See arguments against pseudo-science, e.g. Freud and Marxist theories.

"Writing cached data back to persistent storage is bad", what is the "right" way to write data? I'm not terribly familiar with distributed systems, just curious. Is this referring to write-back vs. write-through?

Top result in Bing/Google is a pdf. Not sure if it's a pre-print edition, looks like a PhD thesis.

I was wondering how this relates to Datomic... I'm not really familiar enough to say much about similarities and differences, but would be interested if someone who is could comment.

I find it somewhat funny that the term "machine intelligence" seems like it was coined in part to distinguish it from "machine learning", but, while this project is clearly part of the latter, they have chosen a moniker using "machine intelligence". Obviously no one owns the word, but it just seems people love using new buzz words and efforts to distinguish these things are quickly muddied.

I don't think it would require a quantum leap forward in tech to take traffic into account...

I wonder if this is actually true at all? I mean, yes, everyone around here absolutely abhors software like this, but there is a class of people who love hunting for bargains and accumulating coupons etc. Is there someone who buys a laptop like this and enjoys the additional advertisements? I always wondered the same about those annoying toolbars, I imagine some people actually perceive these as useful.

And in particular prismjs lets you select lines of code without selecting the line numbers, which you probably do not want.

This also applies to comments within the presentation, not just the verbal part of the presentation.

Very cool! (As a side note, do people actually use the phrase "there has to be a better way!" unsarcastically?)

Isn't this essentially the model for wearables already? Except with the opposite relationship: the phone is the smart device and the watch is relatively "dumb". This makes sense since it is easier for my phone to be much larger and more powerful, I can also take it out of my pocket if it gets too hot, etc. It looks like in this case they've made the watch smart and the larger screen dumb, which is novel, but I'm not sure I see the advantages. Also, I am much more apt to lose my watch than my phone, but maybe that is just me.

I'm not sure this blog post could have been any less dramatic. He could have not written it I suppose, but he brings up valid points that are probably useful for everyone who might be using or interested in Nim. I don't think the attitude here should be "if you don't have anything good to say don't say anything at all."

Yeah this article really says nothing interesting about the languages. The BASIC timings are from 48K Atari 800 system and the Python timing are from some unknown modern system. Not sure what the point is...

Can you suggest any good reads which incorporate the history & motivation of linear algebra? I have had some experience with the common text books, but never put much effort into incorporating it into the way I think, precisely because it did not seem worth my time to just memorize methods without much context.

> 2. cadr is relatively easy, if you know your assembly (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Car_and_cdr#Etymology) :-)

If you know IBM 704 assembly...

The problem I have with this type of lesson, and similarly kata, is that they are always implementing some rather trivial toy example so they they can fit the whole process into some digestible time span. This is useful, but I think there would be a lot of value in watching a seasoned engineer at work in an established code base rather than full end-to-end toy examples.

This makes me think I do not understand what "walkaway safe" means.

And here's the problem - some people just cannot be respectful of other people's time or flow and also you can find a lot of variation between communication styles (e.g. synchronous vs asynchronous) or noise tolerance of people.

Could it be that a solution or mitigation here is to directly address this problem? I think the idea that people are only capable of communicating in a certain way is probably too strict. Maybe it's just my experience but it seems to me that most people (with exceptions of course) don't give or get direct feedback about what type of communication works best for them, more typically they use some passive-aggressive move like brightly colored headphones or just acting annoyed and expect people to get the hint. This probably works to some degree but in a large open space it seems like you need everyone on the same page.