jonathanrmumm

3. Young people who realize this dynamic and start their own companies because old people are less energetic toward picking up new tools / learning new tricks and run circles around them.

Remember my dad taking me here all the time and being amazed by aisles full of bins of random parts. Made you want to tinker.

Embeddings are a new jump to universality, like the alphabet or numbers. https://thebeginningofinfinity.xyz/Jump%20to%20Universality

If we're talking conscious thought, millions of simultaneously firing neurons to form words. If we're unconscious intelligence, it's closer to latent space. A lot of intelligence that can't be articulated.

If we view the person we are looking to hire as a "junior dev", a "junior dev" is what you will get. But if you seek a young, competent software dev—one you might find.

They developed software as "juniors" in companies—we just don't belittle them by calling them "junior devs".

- Linus Torvalds wrote Linux at 21 - Steve Wozniak built Apple I at 25 - Palmer Luckey created Oculus VR at 20 - Vitalik Buterin designed Ethereum at 19 - Mark Zuckerberg coded Facebook at 19

Judgement and taste increases with energy spent—and from a company's perspective, usually you want it to grow in line with your own.

There has never been a more fertile environment for motivated learners to do more with less, and yet we still have a bias as an industry to seek the more experienced hand versus the energetic one.

Try to forget the mindset that you need an authority in order to learn. Better to pretend authorities do not exist.

Embeddings are a new jump to universality, like the alphabet or numbers. https://thebeginningofinfinity.xyz/Jump%20to%20Universality

have it format in yaml instead of json, incomplete yaml is still valid yaml

good developer relations is less shotgun marketing and more proactive technical customer-support

> it is better to start with a minimal creation and grow it as needed

yes, this is a much better explanation than the wikipedia

Ah so it’s more “if it’s not broken enough, don’t fix it”

then someone needs to update the wikipedia

> It refers to the argument that software quality does not necessarily increase with functionality: that there is a point where less functionality ("worse") is a preferable option ("better") in terms of practicality and usability.

yes, why? seems like not that useful of a phrase if it needs an explanation with parenthesis in a wikipedia

why not just say "less is better?"