"Don't plant trees, plant a forest!" In all seriousness, this can kill a startup. You should try to allow for later extension of your product, but you have to actually get one thing to market before you can bring many things to market.
But that isn't the function of marketing at all. Marketing, in the minds of the marketers, is about making you believe that there is no alternative but theirs.
No, I'm not being sarcastic. I'm fairly well read, and I believe in God. I don't think I have a complete knowledge of anything, but I've read and questioned and looked, and yes, I think there's more in favor than against.
I also think there are a lot of people who say more than they know, on both sides of the argument, but that's true of any subject.
Also a legitimate stance. I don't claim to have a corner on the truth, I just find that certain beliefs seem to serve mankind better than others, and they've earned my trust through application.
This is brilliant! "Virtual Reality models and animations galore!"
Quite a slice of history. It's amazing how much the internet has become gentrified since the days when a plain hypertext document sufficed for one of the biggest space agencies in the world.
It's an overview, but not a particularly deep or accurate one. Good on you for starting to think about the big questions, but don't be so dismissive. Serious people with serious reasons have believed every one of these. Don't discount them until you know why they were believed.
How is a sandwich review in any way 'imperialistic'?
Guy has opinions about a sandwich, guy exercises his fourth amendment right to share that opinion. Other people disagree, which is also fine. End of story. How is this even news?
Another point in support of this is that buildings tend to get away with more minor bugs than software does. Walls usually have a subtle bow to them, toilets don't have to fail gracefully if the sewage network gets backed up, doors get installed the wrong direction, there are gaps behind the cabinets, light switches get wired around odd corners, etc.
So long as the building can stand up in an earthquake and looks good enough to sell, that's usually the end of it.
Software, on the other hand, has an air of imperative perfection. If it is even slightly wrong or ugly, it must be entirely wrong. I feel that way myself, and I must sometimes throttle my impulse to fix it indefinitely so that I can meet a business need in time.
That isn't the majority of people, though. Most of humanity lives in either apartments, cookie cutter developments, decades old homes they didn't build, or shanties. They don't get to choose, and customization is a luxury.
This is very unintuitive to me. Most games have some sort of asymmetry built in. For example one player usually goes first. In the game of nim, a clever player can provably always dominate against any strategy if they move first. That doesn't sound like an equilibrium to me...
See, I've always seen the statement that evolution is intentionless to be a bit arrogant. Consciousness, as we are just starting to learn, is a property of emergent networks. Further, we are just starting to discover that phenotypical expression is so much more complex than 1/2mom + 1/2dad = baby. Evolution is calculating something, even if it's inscrutable to us.
Pitch, or indeed much premeditation at all, wouldn't be necessary in a village with five foot alleyways and dried grass roofs. Additionally, tar was a common caulking material. Oh, and running water/chemical foam wasn't usually a thing. And, you know, no trained quick response teams, or well maintained roads and swift transit systems to escape on, or any way to tell the difference between the smoke that always hung around the fireplace and the smoke from the roof being on fire... I could go on.
I say to myself, "Self, what did you learn today?"
But seriously, as a freelancer, I'll usually explain some new process or algorithm to my non-technical wife until it makes sense to her. It's a better version of rubber-ducking that helps you not only understand your own code, but also improves your ability to talk to clients.
Not quite what you were asking, but I think it's relevant. You can't really share the nitty-gritty of technical info with colleagues until you can also give an overview to a layperson.
Excellent point. I suppose I was speaking to power structures, specifically, rather than power in the sense of personal ability. In the end, however, if you want to have power on the scale of civilizations, some, if not most of that power must be symbolic in nature. There's no way to hold a knife to a nation's throat for the long haul without at least a little loyal help.
But, all power is, at its root, symbolic. Stalin only slaughtered as many as he did because people believed in the symbolic power of the state and in him as having some right to lead such an abstract entity with total authority.
Misleading title. The author concedes that interstellar travel may be possible, but that we will have evolved beyond recognition by that time. A fair point, but a bit sensationalized.
CSS is an art in a very literal sense. Once you know the basic technique a book won't help you as much as seeing examples in the wild and trying to reverse engineer them. To learn the nitty-gritty nuts and bolts of CSS, try reading the CSS-Tricks blog and digging into the documentation on MDN.
Finally, to truly master CSS, learn the art of brevity. Most stylesheets I see are terribly bloated and over specified. Always ask, "Can I do this in fewer declarations? Do I really need all of these constraints? Is there a single style that will work smoothly across all sizes without media queries?"