majikandy

Loving this concept perhaps really useful for my work laptop (as in my own one but is only for work stuff) as quite often you just want to quickly backtrack and find that piece of info you looked at earlier rather than navigate to it again. I’d imagine something like a physical wheel on your desk to wind back would be amazing. I have a useless Bose one that never gets used, can imagine it would feel very “black mirror” to use that to rewind.

That’s so funny, I spent about an hour walking around Osaka station the first time I went there trying to figure out how to get out. Ended up back in same place quite a few times. Near the Hankyuu railway staircase.

Seems fair to assume that “current requirements” means current roadmap of requirements. Taken to extreme, if there are no future requirements at all, there is no technical debt.

Nice article, fun to read, I nearly gave up at 3/4 but the sunk cost fallacy took me to the end and I’m glad it did as I enjoyed the reference back to poker. The gem in this article for me was the part about it being more valuable to wind back to the last green the more you have pressed on. I’ll take that thought with me!

I was thinking the same thing, as we got a 486 dx2 66 from gateway 2000, complete with a faulty quad speed cd writer, ms office and encarta. And of course… the cow box. But this was ordered over the telephone from adverts I kept up to date with in computer magazines and the moment the dx2 66 was the best price (the 100 was the silly price one) I got my parents to pull the trigger and buy it. Happy times circa 1993.

Love the parasite analogy, to add to it, it perhaps morphs into a symbiotic relationship between them for a while, with the parasite eventually becoming the host and the original app becoming the parasite that is gradually getting smaller and smaller but you just can’t shift, and the finally one day you clean out that final piece and it feels great. Meanwhile the business got all the new features they wanted when they wanted them and it kept moving forwards at all times.

Isn’t this a slightly different problem? The product built was just vapourware and not really doing the job. So customers went elsewhere when the real version didn’t appear in time? Often companies will win the customers with a genuine working product but complicated code and then hire like crazy and all the new developers struggle and want to rewrite it all. But they mustn’t because it is a working product earning money. So gradual improvement and controlled rewrites of sub areas that need to change the most are focused on to succeed. If a company has gone bankrupt because of spaghetti code of a demo product, it feels to me like the problem was the product being just a demo rather than it being spaghetti code?

70/30 split sounds like there is a reason even if there isn’t primary evidence to backup the exact reason. Logically attack/defence sounds like it works and I was certainly able to imagine that on my first tour of a fort when I was young.

Apps that are just a web app inside an app container are even worse though!

Yep, I don’t use headphones that much either.

I agree this marketing is definitely misleading, this image is a clear representation of a screen. Very black mirror. https://ibb.co/HYpNzxD

I’d say “comfort”. Glasses aren’t comfortable for many people and neither are contact lenses. I have a mild prescription but the discomfort of the glasses (arms, nose bridge, turning head more) is greater than the discomfort of my vision not being ultra sharp (for me). So a future of putting on glasses for the tech really isn’t for me.

I like the idea of comments being impossible and one acts with that in mind. Along with the one about thinking the next person to view your code is a psychopath who knows where you live. Holding those 2 things in mind, you really can have your cake at eat it (too), you can have clean expressive code that covers a lot of the “why” without comments littering the screen.

How are you going to make the code itself scream of its “how and why”? Then failing that you can put a comment if you must.

I have worked with codebase with incredible comments. Changing the code was really hard and laborious and far from a joy to work with. When PRs become back and forth about how to change the wordings of the comments in the code, it is soul destroying, it becomes very time consuming. Like writing a joint novel at the same time as writing the code. Some people like it that way and each to their own, I know I can’t convince them.

Portable external monitor, tell me more.

Yes I remember this, go from long to short with perfect timing and a perfect release moment and you fly off to a ridiculous distance, but the physics didn’t feel wrong about it. So it would make sense that there is something in this.

He wasn’t good enough for her?

Hit back and forward in the browser and you see other people’s generated image rather than your own without hitting the generate image button again.

Great idea. What should we host?

Extremely beautiful

That might make it even easier to decipher. A nice reference point.

Only if you told them you were done, when you weren’t (if following an approach described in the article). I suspect the author also meant, it won’t take longer with this approach. Possibly even faster that without it is completely viable.

Definitely agree, if it works (tests prove it works) it can go live.

This is exactly the type of story I tell when people are anti pair programming. I ask them if they’ve ever lost a days code (usually asking if they ever used source safe) and that when they finally knuckled down to write it again, it took about 20 minutes. As the writing the code wasn’t really the hard part or the bottleneck, solving the problem was the hard part. Hence pair programming having two heads on one problem to solve it better/faster, find the edge cases etc.

Out of curiosity, was it really fast for you to do it in that extra day or did it take all day?

The famous comedian John Cleese speaks about this where he loses a script and has to rewrite it from memory before a deadline. Then he finds the old one and finds out his new one is much better despite thinking it was the same. So he started using it as a technique for better script writing. It is referenced here but I can’t find the video https://www.ideaconnection.com/right-brain-workouts/00186-jo...

I find refactoring sexy. Just saying.

Yes I did speak twice, I didn’t really answer the question though, I just volunteered information to get something done quickly. So maybe 0 was accurate :)

It’s ok, the voice commands are barely understood anyway. At least in the UK they aren’t. Gets it drastically wrong and messes up your navigation destination, because you asked it to open the glovebox “navigating to Columbia”

Both. But perhaps also hiragana/katakana option too, like children’s book do when there is a kanji. Full on kanji is beyond me and I don’t expect to be able to pick it up just by seeing it in these conversations

It’s amazing, it worked brilliantly in Japanese although it got too difficult for me far too quickly and I was relying on the English translation it was showing.

Couple of things. I was promised a fluency score for my conversation but when I finally decided to press the button, I got a login/sign up page and I felt that that “ransom” feeling that a post the other day spoke about. If I’d been given a score, it wouldn’t have stopped me signing up and getting my own account to save the conversation I’d just had. I did sign up but only in the spirit of the fact you want feedback. If it hadn’t come from here I would have abandoned at this point and not come back. Sad but true.

So when I finally did get in, I still didn’t get my fluency score and that conversation was gone forever. I’m left now really wanting to know how I did, but I’ll never know.

I did a quick second conversation and then went straight for the score after a couple of rounds. My score was 0 :(

Btw I’d love it to be able to interrupt the AI because it was speaking away to me but I was ready to speak back but I had to wait or speak over it.

I really like it though and hope it gets smoother and better over time, because I know that I would be a paying customer for something like this that genuinely helped me improve my language skills.

Is this the same as “valves” that were always talked about in the distinctive sound retro (now) guitar amplifiers?