blitz_skull

"The most 'pro' iPhone we've ever created"

Did they uh... even listen to this?

I think our disagreement here may largely be semantics. To be clear, I'd never label myself a "servant leader". I agree I think it's ingenuous to do so. However, if other people use that terminology to describe a type of leader—I get the picture they're trying to paint.

So to be clear, I agree the label is weird and cheesy and maybe should only be used to describe a type of leader (which again, I'd argue is just a good leader). Leaders absolutely should hold themselves to a higher standard due to their responsibility for the good of the team and the fact that they DO have more power.

I'm still not clear on what "pretending" to be a servant would look like. If I'm a shift manager and someone needs to sweep the floors before we leave and one of my team members is a teenager with an exam the next day—damn straight, I'm going go send them home early and sweep up myself. That's "serving" them—putting them before myself. But quite frankly it's also just the right thing to do. So in a sense, yeah I'm a servant in that I am serving my team members, but holy hell if you say, "Yeah, I'm a servant leader so why don't you go ahead and take off early." You're a cheesehead, a weirdo, and probably not actually a good leader. And in that case yeah I agree it's a weird play.

Apologies for the delayed response! I urge you to take a look at a few of the books I listed in a sibling comment. While I have neither the time nor desire to expound at length the copious amount of evidence for the deity of Jesus of Nazareth, there are several men who have done so for me! In addition, these guys were not your devout raised-from-birth Christians who believe simply because they were told. Rather, they believed because they could not disprove the evidence for Jesus. In fact, I believe all 4 men were atheists who set out to disprove Jesus, but came to the conclusion that the evidence supporting his claims to deity are monumental!

- Evidence That Demands a Verdict, by Josh McDowell

- More than a Carpenter, by Josh McDowell

- The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel

- Mere Christianity, by C.S. Lewis

Finally, this is addressed in probably each of these books, but as for your last comment. It's not unthinkable to imagine Jesus was so insane he was willing to die for his "personal views on ethics" (Although there's precious little evidence to support this, see the "Lord, Liar, Lunatic" argument). Nor is it outside the realm of possibility to think that perhaps his closest 12 followers were willing to die for a charade (Although again, there's no logical reason to support this idea)—I imagine stranger situations have occurred.

But consider the vast history of Christianity, littered with martyrs whose only mandate to escape death was simply, "Deny Christ" and were yet unwilling to do so. It begins to become disingenuous to suggest that across 2,000 years people have been willing to die for one man's "personal views on ethics" when all that would be required to avoid said death is to simply say, "Jesus is not God", unless of course you were utterly convinced it was true.

Oops—sorry for the delayed response here!

Yeah I think "Evidence That Demands a Verdict" by Josh McDowell is a great one. He was agnostic and set out to disprove Christianity and found its evidence was impossible to refute.

Others I'd highly recommend would be: - More than a Carpenter, by Josh McDowell - The Case for Christ, by Lee Strobel - Mere Christianity, by C.S. Lewis

I find all of these books fascinating because they're all written by men who were atheists and set out to disprove the "foolishness" of Jesus. In the end, they all came to the same conclusion which is that the evidence that points to Jesus being the Son of God is very heavy. I'm not sure there's any reasonable evidence to the contrary. In fact, most atheists I've known and talked to were atheists not due to reason, but due to emotion. Christianity has a lot of emotional baggage that comes with it. We're all flawed people and unfortunately most people associate Christianity with abuse, rules, and condemnation. That's why I prefer talking about the person of Jesus. I've never met someone who could level a reasonable accusation at the person of Jesus, and after all—He's the entire reason any of us talk about any of this.

If you read all 4 of those books and come away unconvinced I'd love to have a conversation! I was not able to retain my disbelief :)

No one is suggesting that servant leadership is implying their leader is actually a _servant_. Rather, it implies that serving your team humbly should be a priority over stroking your own ego. I'm not sure how useful it is to generalize the concept as "fake masking". Do some people use it as an ego trip? Sure. Are some people good leaders with their people's interest in mind? Absolutely.

Many times in life, someone has to make a call and it's usually the person in charge. Not sure why that has to have malicious intent behind it. You don't have to like the decisions your leaders make, but that doesn't inherently make them bad leaders just because the team isn't 100% on board. (I will concede that good leaders will take the time to get the team on board. It's usually laziness to explain the "why" that results in teams not being on board. That or ego prevents them from letting go of their ideas.)

I think you’ll find personal responsibility is a high bar for most of the world. Americans are not unique in that.

Things like this are why I keep rooting for Kagi. I haven’t purchased a subscription yet because I’m still on my free 100 queries, but I will as soon as they run out. I really love this project!

I think the idea here is that as a leader your primary directive is “serving” those you lead.

As Jocko puts it, when the team wins, the people win too, so your job as a leader is to help them understand the why.

I’ll keep banging the gong—Jocko Willink is a treasure trove of knowledge when it comes to leadership. Servant leadership is really just “good” leadership.

Yeah, it's actually a _feature_ if you've never been lost in the shit show that is node_modules before. I highly prefer Deno's style.

I have not engaged in a similar depth of study of other world religions.

If you prove a correct mathematical formula, you need not spend time figuring out every other incorrect way to solve the problem.

Likewise, once you find the truth it doesn’t require falsifying every other claim to truth for it to remain true. Jesus was the only person whose words and deeds claim deity and with which there is zero evidence to contradict his claims, unlike the likes of Mohammad, Buddha, and countless other claims of godhood—Jesus of Nazareth’s are the only ones that hold up under scrutiny.

Other religions can believe they’ve got a claim to truth if they wish, but truth doesn’t waver due to one’s personal preferences or convictions.

Just because you don’t find a particular set of evidence convincing doesn’t mean it fails to meet the criteria for evidence.

Many an atheist has found God after honestly and earnestly investigating the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus. However, most people don’t have the emotional fortitude to actually investigate the facts with rigor and end up hiding behind the “implausibility” of the resurrection and/or just end up perpetuating pop-atheism with unfounded critiques of the Bible because they’ve never done a proper study of their own.

If you’ve got specific critiques, feel free to field those, but otherwise your comment reads as a rather arrogant write-off of one of the oldest, and most logically-consistent systems of human belief.

Are you certain it's not lifestyle related? I've found that without my morning ritual, I can barely approach anything resembling productivity—and that's at the ripe old age of 28.

My morning ritual consists of getting up early, walking, lifting heavy weights, some coffee and some personal projects to get my brain working. Then I can usually sustain high levels of intense focus until about noon. All my most important work gets done by then. After noon is basically just rest and low-cognitive work like emails and communications.

"Oh my God" does not actually refer to any religion or deity. In common English parlance it is exclusively used to convey shock or disbelief—as seen in this article.

Yes, that game. You must check it out. Easily the best redemption arc of any game development story, ever. By a mile. It’s insane how much content has been put into the game.

While I agree it’s probably a good idea to avoid instinctual aversion in many things, I believe some things in life are too sacred to rely on “data”. Some things we just know to be true, and have to trust that whatever story data might tell isn’t a story we’re interested in.

Keep in mind that science can tell any story you want it to tell as long as you interpret the data in the way you need. That’s why some things, such as our children, cannot be left to slippery slopes such as this.

We’ve already got more than enough data proving that pornography is absolutely destructive and a net negative on all of humanity. I don’t think we need additional data to prove that bringing kids into the mix would somehow make it better.

You’re suggesting that perhaps allowing people to explore an urge that should be fought and suppressed might dissuade them from pushing that urge further resulting in real-world action? Fascinating, do tell me more.

Blatant disregard for children aside, the larger issue here is the presupposition that we should someone permit all urges. Not every thought that passes through your brain should be “explored”; some thing are just bad and should be fought.

Probably moral depravity if I had to guess. Not sure why we even need “an argument” against it. It’s pretty self-evidently wrong.

Yeah, though I consider lying a moral issue, it’s like no one should expect an honest answer to a deceptive question.

I always have an answer that is locked and loaded 20-40% more than what I’m actually making and generally ask for about 20% more than that. I’ve bumped my pay over $100k in 5 years doing that. Keep in mind I also refuse to work for FAANG-y companies.

Where did you get the idea that’s what I’m saying? I didn’t say that or intend to imply it.

Kinda surprising it took this long. I really hope Deno continues to grow in popularity. I greatly prefer the "batteries-included" and Typescript-first approach.

Have we collectively started to listen?

> What is perhaps surprising is that we're so stuck to the idea that profit making is the most important thing to optimize for, instead of individual health.

What makes this surprising to you?

We've forsaken all pretense of moral fiber, we worship entertainment and self-fulfillment at the expense of everything else. And I say "we" in the "What does the general culture edify and promote"—obviously not everyone lives this way. But enough do that it's really unsurprising to me that we worship profits. After all, if I can get mine and live an easy life—why should I care that your life is hard? (I think the answer is that there has to be a higher calling than simply living for yourself, but in our individualistic society good luck pitching that to the masses.)

You're not the first person to mention that, to which I counter: Cascading is a mistake in today's component-first web. It works at a very small scale, and _sure_ some things should be cascaded—which Tailwind absolutely lets you do. But 80% of your styles are going to end up scoped to their component—so you might as well use a tool that leverages that concept to its fullest extent.

All my "hard opinions" aside, I have anecdote that no amount of facts can change—I build things faster, more maintainably, that look BETTER than anything I did before Tailwind. Until those pillars stop being true—Tailwind will have my heart.

Actually, the "C" in CSS stands for "Mistake". Cascading styles are not a good idea, and Tailwind encourages using styles in a way that makes sense for a component-first web.

If you want to cascade all your styles all the way down, by all means go for it. However, I aim for readable / scalable styles rather than dogmatically "cascading" everything just because it's in the name.

Emphasis on "good". I don't classify developers who base their decisions on "Well Google is doing it" as "good".

Cool hot-take but it’s not true. You’re literally learning CSS when you learn tailwind. And no one (good) picks up a tool solely because it’s shiny, they pick it up because they find it has utility, which evidently LOTS of people do.

And if you don’t think it’s reusable then you at least need to bring an argument for why that’s so because the docs, personal anecdote, and the opinion of LOTS of people is completely opposite.

So: - You ARE learning CSS, you’re just putting it where it belongs: on the element it affects - It’s modernity doesn’t matter at all - It’s literally as reusable as raw CSS

I can’t downvote you, but you’re definitely wrong.

That misses the point. This is still worse than seeing all your styles in the place where they apply. SASS/LESS just make it faster and more succinct to write styles in css files rather than in the components in which they live and even more importantly—on the actual ELEMENTS that they apply to.

I will say the general _idea_ of scrum is alright, but the moment it's used to gauge team "progress" it ceases to be a good measure anymore. Most of the time, it's just used to navel gaze and/or instead of asking for direct feedback from teams, managers will use it as a crystal ball to try to divine what "blockers" the team is facing.

Hm... All this to say—no—I've never had a positive experience with it.

Got any good examples of outstanding mac apps? I think I'd throw "Things 3" into that bucket for sure.