jksmith

If you're ok with limiting to (mostly local) scopes, it's fairly easy to write a general purpose mark/release then sugar it up with macros in FPC/Lazarus.

Sure thing, fascinating stuff.

I teach all 12 SAFe certifications, so I'm familiar with the framework. The issue that SAFe identified, is the very issue I'm bringing up here. In the case of this framework, it gives managers the chance to keep managing people, but with an out of box framework that keeps them from the burden of understanding systems engineering fundamentals that emphasize flow. That's the problem in a nutshell with SAFe - layer 1 process and team fundamentals are sacrificed in favor of a layer 2 framework. And managers get to lead meetings and report-outs.

Otherwise, SAFe is ok. It just puts some structure around managing an increment of increments - another chance to inspect and adapt, pivot, whatever is needed for minimum viable product, plus managers feel like they (managers) are useful by guiding PI planning, whatever.

The reality? High performing teams tend to snicker at SAFe. They think things like confidence vote events are silly because they expect product owners to be bringing them nothing but work-items that already meet their confidence standards. Otherwise their time is being wasted with this event. Additionally, high performing teams will refuse to plan out multiple iterations worth of work (as done in PI planning), when they expect to have a healthy backlog to work that already meets their readiness standards for multiple iterations. All they'll say is prioritize that work and they'll knock it out. But once again, planning out multiple iterations helps managers reinforce telling people what to do in a micro fashion.

"Principles of Product Development Flow" This is an academic standard for queuing theory and flow of value by Don Reinertsen. Tough read btw.

"The Fifth Discipline" by Peter Senge. This is a classic text that also covers the mental model side of the shift from managing people to managing flow.

"Team Topologies" by Skelton and Pais. Another classic on team structure as it relates to flow of value.

And well, have to mention my little book, "Agile V2 Coach's Field Manual" available on Amazon. Hardcover only. I need to write a rev, but still holds up regarding the concept of codifying behaviors into a delivery system, thus cutting down on politics, finger-pointing, unethical decision-making, and other crap that represents the legacy people-management model. Quick read.

Lot more books available. This is a very rich area of study that's been around since people have been trying to figure out how to get out of each other's way for better outcomes.

Most arguments missing the nasty side of companies. Speaking from an execution consultant pov: Most companies still rely on the easiest form of getting something done, which is management telling people what to do. Current state of management is generally if they can't appear to tell people what to do, their ability to execute anything is greatly impaired, then their jobs are threatened.

So where does most organizational leadership come from? Paying their dues as management in a prior life. So they're inculcated with the same mental model. Difference between a leader and a manager is, managers tell people what to do, while leadership like to tell their reports what they should have done.

Anyway all these components feed the whole back to work thing. Managers keep their jobs by telling people what to do, and the easiest way to do that is via the official office environment. It's also the most expensive and inefficient way to get anything done, leading to most corporations having very mediocre delivery systems. That's my take after consulting with numerous F500s.

Sure, there are exceptions; work dependent on equipment that isn't practical for remote applications, heavy experimentation with specific environment requirements, etc. But if your office life is centered around a laptop, then use the "laptop" as intended.

So what's far more strategic is moving from managing people to managing the flow of value. Manager mind blown. The latter doesn't have the same dependency on having people come into the office, but it's a much more sophisticated approach requiring at least some interest in business systems engineering, which is more complicated. But the approach is far more efficient, cost-effective, and requires far less energy usage. Manager refrain: "Can't I just go back to telling people what to do, in the office?"

character in Willy Wonka.

Augustus!!!

>The computer that Scotty uses to show transparent aluminum was originally going to be an Amiga, but Commodore would only give permission if they bought their own. Apple Computer was willing to give them a Mac for free.

Without knowing all the details, that seems like a dumb move by Commodore. Too bad though that some geeks weren't consulted, since they might have fixed up a Symbolics machine for the scene, which was a movie prop during the 80's.

Why do I feel like the use case here is "Because unfortunately I can't use linux"?

Yes, his book "How to Get Rich" is an entertaining and favored read around here.

The conversation here seems a bit binary. Maybe I missed a few posts. The whole solar thing is not realized until cooperatives de-grid in favor of their own local grids, along with an arbitrage sharing model. That has the potential to to manage all power needs (including electrical cars). It's a scaling issue sort of in between entirely centralized and rugged individualism.

Of course the tech for this is a real threat for utilities, so it wouldn't surprise me if they would go to any length to stop such and effort. Same could be said for any deflationary tech like micro reactors.

"If it floats, flies, or fornicates, better to rent it than to own it..." Felix also suggested that anything over $80m is too much trouble. A learned perspective no doubt.

Tangentially to secant, BTC community resistance is in the spirit of maintaining a solid base layer that is not perpetually in startup mode given stakeholder motives. Use other coins for that purpose.

Regarding changes that still maintain or even enhance this goal of long-lived store of value, I bet they'd be fine with that, even if the work effort of BTC transactions increased.

Yeah, but it's not hip, and it's too wordy with BEGIN/END, and the data structures are too restrictive, and the compiler nags you, and the like. And you can write an 8M line codebase in it, touched in all kinds of foul ways, and it still works. That's the biggest codebase I've ever worked on at least.

Take that as a small (subjective) clue. Anything that is great about Rust or Nim or <..> could also have extended Pascal or M2 for the same result, and much sooner. Especially goes for M2, because the grammar was so small, thus avoiding the old PL1 traps from an overloaded parser.

FPC needs smart macros, needs to backport M2 interfaces, and the solid green thread spec* backported from M2, but it really is in the ballpark. You want gc? Well, fair enough, but you can write a pretty good mark/release* facsimile with RTTI. Or how about Eiffel simulated contracts with open arrays?

And Lazarus, good grief what a 30 year old premiere open source project. No point in even talking about how awesome it is.

Co-Pascal has been doing co-routines for 45 years.

In turbo pascal, you could create mini-heaps that could be dumped most anytime. They weren't smart, but still a cool feature.

Agreed TSM2 was a sweet effort, and that green thread traffic light demo was fun to play with.

Wirth's original language design book (yes I have a proofed copy and it's not for sale). Also an awesome book I'd recommend is KN King's Modula 2. I loved that book.

I've probably written 100k lines or so in M2 30 years ago, and I still miss it. Usable interfaces and sub-interfaces at the module level instead of class interfaces, top notch green threading, really strict compilation - it helped programmers become better programmers instead of commodity programmers. Think about that in the future when you get into an autonomous driving vehicle. If not for the tyranny of C, maybe it would be the systems language of choice if it had been given the opportunity to evolve and get some more commercial apps supporting it.

You can do some stuff to the Lazarus ide env to get it close to tolerating a M2 style using macros and such, but it needs a bit of work. Just haven't had time to fiddle with the code yet. Otherwise, the FPC/Lazarus combo is amazing and continues to be one of the greatest open source communities of all time, IMO.

Carr's "The Big Switch" in reverse. Technology ushering in a decentralization effect. And that's fine. Work at home. Communities buy micro reactors, Starlink ready to go. Low carbon produce that doesn't have chemical shit all over it. Maybe testosterone rates go up, maybe cancer rates go down. Probably a good idea all around.

Interestingly, arguably THE most agile company in the world (Spacex) probably doesn't use any ALM tools as supported by the agile industry. Maybe a backlog tool in there somewhere, but I bet their bullshit footprint is pretty light.

>Only on hacker news does a physicist who spends their days criticizing string theory (and whose expertise there makes sense) make the front page doing an analysis on testosterone.

So true.

High testosterone is great for people doing jobs that make those people disposable. In the past, that's been the male gender, if you lump them into a group. If activities like combat, climbing power poles, contact sports (women making inroads), are deprecated by tech or whatever, then I guess less testosterone is needed. To add, since population numbers are stagnating, why do we need disposable and non-disposable jobs drawn down gender lines at all? Why do we need our sports separated by gender?

To add, cutting your nuts off has been shown by studies to extend life in males. Whatever your pref is I guess. I'll sacrifice a few years to keep my nuts, thanks. I love my nuts. Oh, and my penis. Strictly my personal preference. To each their own.

I'd like to officially state for the record that I got through the original DX on hard mode, no lethal weapons and only a few mods. Greatest game ever. Eventually decided Illuminati was the most reasonable ending. Kind of a Milton thing with cinnamon buns.

Old days brought forward. Remember mark/release? With combo of code macros and open arrays using Lazarus/ FPC:

mark_begin // after allocs,creates

[parse1, sl1, sl2]

mark_end

... lines of code ...

release // end of proc, frees everything you marked allocated

I read a bit of this, and it struck me as some more generic fast food consumption, so I got bored. I've consulted for 5 F500's now, and by far the biggest issue with managers at these companies is that they still focus on managing people and not managing the flow of value.

Yes, there is no language project that isn't C based and hasn't already been resolved all this multiple times over. C beer goggles.

Seemingly far more insidious to me is surveillance justified by business to monitor remote work.

This is forcing a solution to fit the problem.

Yeah. And all the mouthpieces on YT talking about how significant this is are assuming BR really believes anything in anything. All BR may be doing is setting the world up for a crypto pump/dump of Shakespearean proportions.

I'll continue my own relationship with BTC, but always qualified by knowing the world is mostly lies. Human, All Too Human.

This may be like a proof of work cryptography issue, except the burden of work is on the deep fake. Just ask a battery of questions, just like out of a Bladerunner scene or whatever. This is still the problem with AI. It depends on tons of datasets and connectivity. Human data and human code are kind of the same. Even individually, we can start with jackshit and still come up with an answer, whether right or wrong. Ah, Lisp.

Just for some conspiratorial fun, what if you converted your house into a meth lab? You're just assuming that Rumba will use collision and move mapping. Pretty crude by tomorrow's standards. What is the evolving difference between innocent search for marketing purposes vs search for illegal use, the consumer of the data product?

So the law reads that this only applies to bystanders? Including spouses/family?

What if you were on a bus, sitting across from a cop bashing somebody's face in? Ok, back up two rows to be able to video. Check!

What if you have to get out of your car, but leave your camera running and the cop decides to drag you down and put a knee on your neck within 8 feet?