|
Archive: February 13, 2023
|
There are two kinds of jewelry stores. In one kind, you walk by the window, they have a bunch of beautiful jewelry. Watches. Necklaces. Rings. Earrings. Even maybe personal items like mirrors and makeup cases. They are amazing. You are dazzled. You will go into the store because you see something that catches your eye.
The second kind of store is more selective. The window has a small number of items. They are spaced apart. They are amazing. You are intrigued. You will go into the store because you think there might be something else great that they didn't have in the window.
Correspondingly, there are two kinds of blogs. I think I am blogging about too much stuff, all over the place. I am hoping you see something that catches your eye, but you might have to travel past a lot of other stuff to find it. I need to have one or two items in the window, carefully selected. Maybe you'll follow because you think there might be something else great coming.
Well there is another dimension to blogs - some are linkers, where the blogger mostly relays you to things others have posted, and acts like a filter, and some are thinkers, where the blogger mostly posts things they've thought, maybe in reaction to things others have posted. I do both. Might want to do less of the former, and more of the latter. Stay tuned!
|
|
 Here's another concept for you to - er - disregard completely: Chesterton's Fence. The principle that reforms should not be made until the reasoning behind the existing state of affairs is understood. Per Wikipedia, the principle originated in G. K. Chesterton's 1929 book The Thing:
There exists in such a case a certain institution or law; let us say, for the sake of simplicity, a fence or gate erected across a road. The more modern type of reformer goes gaily up to it and says, "I don't see the use of this; let us clear it away." To which the more intelligent type of reformer will do well to answer: "If you don't see the use of it, I certainly won't let you clear it away. Go away and think. Then, when you can come back and tell me that you do see the use of it, I may allow you to destroy it."
It's a useful principle, in many, many areas. In my own field of software design, I see this so often; it's tempting to rewrite old software entirely, routing around all the weird little kludges that have accumulated. Sometimes this makes sense. But each of those kludges is there for a reason, and not understanding those reasons is dangerous.
Oh, and an interesting note; if you Google "Chesterton's Fence", many of the hits will be articles telling you this principle is wrong. Since this principle goes back to 1929, they should explain why it was right then, before explaining why it is wrong now :)
|
|
 I have a new phrase-I-dislike-a-lot: "dropped". As in, "the latest episode of Poker Face just dropped". Do not like. At all. Please put it in the same ungrammatical trash pile as "literally", "same difference", "my bad", and "sick". ("Utilize" remains in a class of its own.)
The latest episode of Poker Face has been released, and it's great :)
 This, I love. CeramicSpeed drivetrain, driven. It's not real yet and may never be, but still seems like it should be. Chains and Derailleur shifting seems so dated. 
 Another coolness: the Rantoge clock. A kickstarter, saw an ad for it on Facebook. Not considering the kit itself, but thinking about whether something like this might be attempted with 3D printing. The general concept of displaying "LED-like numbers by pivoting segments seems transferrable, even if the mechanism must differ.
 MSN: 'Impossible' new ring system discovered at the edge of the solar system, and scientists are baffled. I love impossible things in space :) and also love Quaoar, a small "planet" half the size of Pluto which orbits the sun outside Neptune's orbit. Clearly a good starbase for aliens.
 More ring things: Saturn’s Rings Are Acting Strange – Hubble Captures Mysterious “Spokes”. Less likely to be an alien starbase effect, more likely gravitational turbulence. The Quaoarians are investigating :)
Not sure what to make of this: code with swearing is better code. I'm a huge believer in code comments - have sometimes been accused of over-commenting, which I don't think is a thing, but I've never ever sworn in them.
 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: What I Think About LeBron Breaking My NBA Scoring Record. Pure class.
Russell Beattie: How I saved Super Bowl 50 for Amazon. A great story, and rings SO true. I especially like the lag between realizing there's a problem and pushing out a fix for it.
No word on whether he swore in his code comments...
 Jean-Louis Gassee: The Musk Method And Twitter. An interesting read and take. I think we need some time to pass before we evaluate Elon's impact on Twitter; all of his successes were failures at a given point in time.
Stopping now. It's time for this post to "go gold". Another phrase-I-dislike-a-lot ... the correct term is "ship". Going gold is after you have shipped 500,000 copies! :)
|
Return to the archive.
|
|
