Singletoned

You are not wrong. There are lots of people who feel and act like you, and when they get together on the same team they can be very productive.

I feel that a lot of places have a culture of agreeability. They are focused on fixing disagreement rather than fixing the underlying problem. A truth-telling person isn't suited to those environments.

I also feel that a "no brilliant jerks" policy is an anti-neuro-diversity policy. It weeds out high-functioning autistic and psychopathic people. I think any homogenous environment created from such a policy would be a dangerous thing.

I used to hate them to a phobic degree, now I just hate them. I really dislike how much people are dismissing this. If I hated spiders, people wouldn't say "Oh you're just covering up an anxiety disorder".

Anything but pytest is good.

Pytest is full of magic and can be horrendous for a newcomer to your team. You can't work out what is happening just by reading the tests, you have to know how pytest works.

Also, when something breaks in pytest, all the magic means that it can be very hard to work out what is happening.

There's defintitely room for an advanced spell checker that can say "This is valid, but probably wrong".

Sometimes I think of this as being trapped at a local optima, where striving to improve can't take you anywhere better. You have to make a jump to somewhere different and then start trying to optimise again in order to reach a more optimal optima.

Also lying. If there's no comeback, then there's no real downside to heavy exageration.

That which DOES adapt will also perish sooner or later.

Yeah, that was pretty tenuous. And assertion that women buy Apple products to deter "romantic rivals from poaching [their] relationship partner" seems almost ridiculous.

I would say that iPhones and MacBooks are almost mass-market these days. Sure, they are more expensive than the alternatives, but they are so ubiquitous that can't really be considered status symbols anymore, can they?

He also states:

> There is no scientific evidence to suggest fasting does any of the above...

You can never know that there's NO scientific proof for something because you can't even know for sure that you've read all the studies.

Yeah, maybe Magit is also the killer app for the 'package' system as well.

> i know its supposed to be a general truth, that regulation raises costs. i mean how can it not, since in the absence of regulation costs would be minimized.

There's lots of cases where a lack of regulation causes higher prices. Such as monopolies and oligopolies.

Remember that companies seek to maximise profit above all else. They only lower prices if it helps them to maxmise profits.

I'd be genuinely interested to find out what you feel is real about the money compared to the nothing you got in exchange?

Also how does the system work from your point of view?

"Language X allows you to be more undisciplined" doesn't sound like a great selling point for those languages.

I find quite the opposite. Having worked as a permie and as a contractor, I have found that contractors can be much more likely to push back. They are much less susceptible to the group-think that afflicts permanent developers, and (possibly due to their higher cost) their opinion can be taken more seriously.

It's a small data point, but the in-game market in Fifa17 suggests that there's 3 times as much PS4 activity than Xbox One activity. Given that it's one of the biggest games on either platform, that would suggest that yes, they are losing out to Sony.

Do you have any evidence for this or is it pure speculation?

> don't forget philosophy includes includes silly topics like "Is truth the same as beauty, and beauty the same as truth", or the nature of God.

That's like saying science includes silly topics like homeopathy and "conquering the seven signs of aging". Just because people claim they are doing science, doesn't mean that they are. The same applies to philosophy.

We tend to use tests for just this case. You change anything you want, then see which tests break, and fix all the places.

I definitely agree that dynamic typing doesn't scale as well as static typing, though.

I think people are downvoting it because you are ranting.

A general heuristic that is useful in life is that if someone is foaming at the mouth and shouting, the things they say probably aren't that useful. (And you definitely come across like that. EG someone scanning the text would see "_PATHETIC_", and would assume that the emotional part of your brain has been engaged rather than the rational part).

The use very early on of "All soda is UNEQUIVOCALLY bad for one's health!", probably put a lot of people off. It is trivially hard to refute (any example of any soda providing any health benefit (eg rehydration) proves you wrong), and again makes it seem like you are making illogical, emotional arguments.

The use of "Anyone who reads the whole thing, and still downvotes, is someone with their head in the sand" is a cheap nasty trick that will turn people against you even if they agree with you.

Try waiting until you have calmed down and rewriting it in a better way.

I strongly suspect that it is possible for a language to be too powerful.

The more capacity a language has to let you do wonderful things, the more capacity it has to let you do truly awful things as well. ("With great power comes great responsibility" and all that).

Also, something about the expressivity of the code means that your code is wonderful, but other peoples code is potentially a nightmare.

Which Imposter's Handbook do you mean? I've looked and found a couple, and both look interesting.

> "It's about as close to objectively true as you can get"

I read that as you saying that "Human life is precious" is true, though maybe I have misunderstood. (Don't take this as that I agree with the other guy though).

> I am frustrated by the fact that I have to keep looking up syntax for particular loops or method calls.

Have you ever tried to deliberately memorize the syntax? Just repeating the same action for 10k hours doesn't make you an expert.

It's like how sportsman don't improve by competing constantly. They improve through deliberate practice. Work is like competing, you aren't trying to improve, you are trying to get stuff done.

Most linters would have suggested correcting it to:

validated_items = [_ for _ in items if is_validated(x)]

where _ is used as a safe variable that can always be clobbered. (Though this does also clash with its use as a gettext function for strings).

I don't find either of the Ruby versions clear at all. Both contain unnecessary syntax.

Ruby seems to be going down the same path as Perl in trying to make all possible combinations of characters valid programs.

> Ironically, I've have an English bachelors degree

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that was a clever and subtle joke.

Just cause one thing is more important than another, doesn't mean the other thing is unimportant. You appear to be arguing against discussing tools, because they aren't as important as other things.

Have you tried https://feedbin.com/ ?

It came out as a response to the closure of Reader, and I actually prefer it. They've kept everything very simple.

Sadly you are right. In person, an unskilled manager can tell if it looks like you are working hard, even if they don't understand what you are doing. Remotely, they can't even tell that, and are effectively blind.

To be fair, the premise of the story is that "Programming Doesn’t Require Talent or Even Passion", and I can confirm that I've met plenty of untalented and unpassionate programmers.

Obviously the talented ones will outperform the untalented ones (pretty much by definition), but not everyone has to be great. There is a strange pressure in this industry, almost that if you aren't great, then you are failing. It's taken me 10 years to get comfortable with the fact that I'm never going to be a 'name' (ironically, despite my name).

There's plenty of room for mediocre people in this industry (not that I want to work with them, but there is plenty of work elsewhere for them to do).