marklgr

Check that you're not making a donation per minute too :)

> The answer is very simple: productivity + youthful optimism.

Culture also plays an important role. In the U.S., work ethics largely trumps work-life balance, and the threat of being perceived (or seeing oneself) as a slacker spurs you to work long hours or take very few holidays. It also relieves some anxiety, as in, "I work hard, at least they can't take that away".

But there is a high price to pay for it, and burnouts or massive regrets later in life are parts of that price.

Hype is often the prospect of a huge success, but it always remains a long shot. As another comment said, you can short the stock each time there's a hype according to you and you'll often make a profit--until you don't, and you'll take a very heavy loss.

I assume GP was refering to the "great work" part, but even then it's just matter of style; the point was only to show approval without nitpicking, not emphatic congratulations.

Exactly. If this article annoys you, read it again carefully, it does _not_ argue against feedback in general.

I think Sivers can make the distinction between commenting on some draft wirh feedback welcome and a demo of some feature about to be released.

I find it brilliant, personally. Users of sysdig tend to be sysadmin or devops with a strong *nix background, so the CLI sounds like 'from the comfort of your command line" to them.

Reusable code, frameworks or plugins are fine, the problem is their cambrian explosion since now anyone can jump in and publish some JavaScript or Go code, especially with the micro-stuff trend. So we end up with zillions of projects competing for traction, and we move from one new cool and shiny thing to the next, for all (micro-)components of the stack.

This is the often-forgotten cost of competition (for all its merits) as opposed to cooperation: it wastes time and energy.

> any benefit received now is far out shadowed by the negatives.

Is it backed up by numbers? As a customer, I agree with you, but our annoyance could be less important than all the customers that quickly pick some product they neeed as long as it got enough stars, without going much into the reviews.

But humans mostly want to be part of some group, and that's the problem with the current trend of ultra-individualism: people will be much easier to influence by dangerous groups that fill their need for belonging. If there were a stronger sense of community in the first place, instead of the strong emphasis on the autonomous, self-sufficient and competing individual, one could wonder if radical religious or ultranationist groups would be as significant.

> Documentation and code is scattered all around

Vim and Emacs both have excellent built-in manuals.

Happenned just this week to me; I was wondering if I had not copied the wrong link somehow. Annoying enough to look for another image host.

But where is the metadata? With OP's tool, it is in some db, so you don't have to tamper with your files or their name.

You can have some poor's man tag management with subdir-per-tag containing softlinks, but it gets unwieldly pretty quick.

The US have always strictly controlled what they imported (if only via tariff) and what they exported.

If a business wants to operate in a foreign country, it seems natural to me to follow the rules of that country; the fact that the business did not open an office in that country looks irrelevant--otherwise, do not open any office abroad and do what you want.

Incidentally, I wonder how the situation would be handled and what the opinion would be if some big foreign company operating in the US were shut down in the same way.

> Wouldn't the world be flush with Portugal's product in both industries rather than only in wine?

It depends on the difference in value for both industries, compared to the difference in productivity for both countries. That's why it's called comparative advantage. If a product is massively more valuable than the other one, then it could make sense to specialize on it, even if the other country is much less productive. The classic example is, a professor can type faster than their secretary, but it still makes sense for them to specialize on their field and let the secretary do the typing.

Vim documentation is solid too: it's included in the editor (like Emaces), and you can look things up with `:help` org `:helpgrep`. There are both tutorials, end-user-oriented pages and comprehensive references. IMO, Emacs is still slightly ahead with its C-h a/f/c` commands, but both projects boast quite good documentation.

The question is not "can these problems be more or less solved" with Cython or Numpy, but: we shouldn't have these problems in the first place. We haven't talked about deployement yet, which is another wart of Python. I guess it can also be kind of solved with another lib/tooling yet-to-come, but how many of these things are we going to pile, whereas a newer language could get it right, or at least, better, from the word go?

> One emulates a freaking man page.

It's far from the worst.

It often _is_ the most sensible choice, _for them_. The problem is, not everyone is doing the same job in the same environement, and they have a hard time realizing that. Their empathy/imagination stays too close to their own experience.

If we are talking about N. "fuck you money" Taleb, then he does not throw tantrums, but he resorts to pretty obnoxious behavior on a regular basis.

> Money will find its way. People will find their information and entertainment. New channels will form. Capitalism works quite well for this.

Depends on what you call 'working well': we currently witness the direct consequences of the commoditization of what could arguably be considered as a public service--namely, access to trustworthy information for all--, but somehow some still have faith in that model.

You are perfectly right that money will find its way, but the question is: whose money, and for what goal? Big corporation or mogul's money, who want to buy mindshare in public opinion and trade it for influence in the political sphere, like, say, the good media networks of M.Berlusconi, Bouygues and tons of others?

"X sucks" doesn't say much, except you don't like X (for whatever reasons). You need to say what it is supposedly bad for, for whom, in what context, and compared to what.

Quite true, and it's also important to make the most of your breaks when you get some, or roll with the punches when you need to. So there definitely are skills to gain and efforts to make. You got to play the cards you are dealt, and you can play them well or not, but at the end of the day, on a short timespan as human life, the dominant factor remains luck, by far.

If only people could realize the insane role (good/bad) luck plays in life. I believe it is often a difference between American and European culture: the former very strongly promotes individual responsibility, so when you succeed it's all to your merits, and when you fail you can only blame yourself.

Right, they are very different things. GP's point about morality stands, though: it's orthogonal to both markets and evolution.

> And people have been compelled to provide passwords in the court of law

You can have encrypted data that accept two different passwords, producing different decrypted data of your choice. This is like the 2nd code that mute the home security alarm when you are forced to do it, but still calls the police.

> I don't believe this is pointless tech churn, akin to fashion.

This is not pointless, but it is pretty uncontrolled. Basically, there is a natural tendency for engineers to want and rewrite old stuff, once all the flaws of once-cherished yesteryear solutions are glaring. Normally, engineers don't have a freehand in ditching old projects and rewriting from scratch, so they have to maintain what exists.

But with all the startups and the site redesigns, now they can, and they do. Why not--it's fun, it replaces old solutions that showed their limits, and the scope is somewhat limited; it's just a website, after all. Moreover, everyone can jump in and create their foobar.js lib or framework; the core node/JS is pretty easy.

> It really feels to me, at least, that there is a direction that the tooling is heading.

It is quite uncertain. Progress is made when you build on previous work, but here it is mosly about saying that the old solution doesn't work eventually, so let's do it this way instead. It looks a lot like infinite recursion, with pretty thin state.

This is not just about tools still working; it's also about maintenance, evolutions, bugfixes, libraries, available workforce etc. If you happen to use an unpopular tool, then you can't easily leverage other people's work and it's harder to find qualified engineers to work for you.