thathonkey

Most of their rap annotations are either inaccurate or complete bullshit. When it comes to "definitions" of slang, they're usually pretty good - for example, dun-ta-duns mention. When it comes to more subjective analysis of prose though it's pretty laughable how bad/ill-equipped the contributors tend to be at it - for example, "sleep is the cousin of death."

I wouldn't have expected this result necessarily but it is interesting how with eReaders, you completely lose that spatial memory that you get from reading traditional paper bound books. I bet you could approximate where a passage you remember is without knowing the page # after reading a traditional book. Of course, eReaders have the advantage of being able to search for text so finding passages isn't really a problem.

(USA) Just wanted to point out that "BTW" is most commonly expected to be an acronym for "by the way" whereas the shorthand for "between" is typically written "b/w"

edit: title has been fixed! :)

So the steps would be:

1) Obfuscate the private view by liking everything. This raises the signal-to-noise ratio exponentially and surely makes it hard(er) for "them" to characterize you. The longer you do this for, the more effective this strategy will be I would think.

2) Delete from public view.

The most puzzling part about this article is that apparently BuzzFeed has an editor-in-chief.

The graph you linked shows them already on the uptick before going to do the photos but the article doesn't mention that.

> 90% of it is your effort in either case.

No, it's not anywhere near 90%. That is a number you pulled out of your ass that is diametrically opposed to every finding from the study described in the article.

I agree with what you said but some of these problems could be helped by a better public education system. Just because your parents don't understand finance or the tax code doesn't mean you should have to figure it out yourself. There should be a high school class or two on these kinds of practical subjects (USA).

Is something different

The current state of affairs is not much better than Reddit (I'm talking about /r/programming here specifically, as I used to be a long time reader who switched to HN several years back), honestly. There's just a bit less vitriol on average (but also less humor). I don't know what the solution is either. To your point about "resist[ing] letting irksome things irk you" - I agree, and it can be very hard. It takes dedicated practice to become "well-adjusted" to the world around us. The degree to which you can change the world around you is much smaller than the degree to which you can change yourself.

I'd recommend watching this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DKYJVV7HuZw

Then, if you liked it, listen to the entire speech that was the inspiration behind it (the video above is only a small section and I don't really like it but I put it first because I think it's more accessible than the entire thing for the uninitiated): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CrOL-ydFMI

I too like to build fully functional games and then reclassify and promote them as experiments.

I could say it worked pretty well for Facebook but that would be too easy. Seriously though, I know it is very in vogue to hate PHP or at least favor X language over PHP and has been for a long time. I'm not trying to sell you on the idea that PHP is objectively the best language or even a "good" language. That is beside the point I'm trying to make which is that it literally (still) powers the majority of the internets' websites. Tons of new websites are still being made using PHP and THAT is a tough pill to swallow for many people of the opinion that it has no merit.

I don't personally enjoy programming in PHP but the way people act as if it isn't massively important strikes me as obtuse and/or petty.

There's plenty of reasons why there would be such a state of affairs. Probably the biggest is that there is no clear winner in this space. D3 is shoring up, but it is quite a bit more complex for non-devs IMHO than what this looks to be. Frankly this is a pretty lazy comment. You could just look at the link's "Start" page for <5 minutes and see for yourself why it's different enough to warrant existence and could legitimately be in the running with the X other JS frameworks that have overlap in canvas drawing.

I mean it's in beta, clearly, and people are in here harping about the accessibility of one of the presentations on the site and comparing it to relatively mature (eg D3 is on v3) frameworks. That isn't very fair.

o Complex, confusing terminology including multiple non-obvious names for various components. o Huge number, about 148, of commands with many sub-commands that often do non-obvious, even unrelated things.

> Git has a learning curve. No way around it. I would argue that it is an extremely powerful vcs worth spending the time to learn.

o git rebase enables users to rewrite history which subverts what should be the main, if not only, function of a version control system.

> There are some situations where rebase are permissible. Again, this goes back to the learning curve. On most teams, though, I find it helpful to just put a ban on rebasing.

o Git has been bundled with code review systems like Gerrit which encourages developers to rebase heavily to create a false history presenting themselves as fantasy 10X programmers who don't make mistakes, debug, engage in trial and error, or all the other things developers actually do. When a bug does slip through as if often does despite the supposed quality-control benefits of code review, then reconstructing what happened from the rebased "history" can be a nightmare.

> I've never heard of this/this happening but this doesn't sound like a specific gripe against Git. Either way I don't know enough to counter it.

o There are numerous commands to do similar, overlapping but nonetheless different tasks. If for example you want to back up to earlier versions of code you can do git revert, git reset --hard, git reset --soft, git checkout -- <SHA>, git checkout <SHA> -- all of which do different but overlapping things.

> These commands do similar, but different things. Part of the allure of Git is its immense flexibility and power. On the CLI, the only way to do this really is to have a lot of commands and options. Again, take the time to learn Git and you will be rewarded.

o A supposed virtue of git is that it makes it extremely easy to create "branches." This often leads to a proliferation of branches, making locating changes and reconstructing the history of changes extremely difficult. A change can occur on a local branch on one developer's computer, be rebased into another local branch and then finally rebased or merged into the shared "master" branch.

> This is a workflow problem. You need to talk to your teammates and establish habits to stay in sync.

o Cryptic hexadecimal SHA for identifying commits instead of sequential numbers for individual files as well as snapshots of the entire project. Even if you track down the tricks to compile the SHA into a program or file name, the SHA is not sequential making it difficult to know which version of a file or group of files is in a program.

> I've never found this to be an issue whatsoever.

o These many flaws in git and its command line interface have resulted in a proliferation of third-party add-on tools like the Android project's repo utility, gitk, magit in Emacs, sourcetree, many of which fail to fully wrap the complexity of Git forcing users to both master the wrapper tool and the Git command line especially on more complex projects. Some of these GUI/wrapper tools like Android repo seem to have serious bugs as well.

> The CLI is fine and consistent IMO. Sourcetree is great if you prefer GUI and has all the power most users need.

o Lack of backward compatibility with RCS-style version control systems like Subversion. Instead of building on 30+ years of success and experience with RCS-style version control systems, but extending them sensibly for distributed projects, Git took a "reinvent the wheel badly" approach.

> That is a ridiculous thing to say. Git brings a very unique and powerful paradigm to VCS which is the distributed model. It also allows for a variety of different workflows and usages due to its flexibility. Not adhering to an existing standard is not ipso facto a flaw.

o A fanatical, cult-like following apparently mesmerized by Linus Torvalds that is unable to recognize or acknowledge the many obvious problems with Git.

> I have extensively used CVS, SVN, Git, and Mercurial and I vastly prefer Git over the others. SVN is fine, but Git allows for a special flexibility that once you become a power user makes it hard to go back to anything else. I don't think there is anything cult-like surrounding Git... it is simply very popular, and rightfully so.

Big websites would host jQuery themselves typically on their own CDN.

I'm talking about people who need websites in general. Not your fancy startup. Also please name me a single startup that for some reason could not flourish using PHP as opposed to some other language?

It's really more about the talent of your team than the language you choose to write your app(s) in.

There are many other options, none of which enjoy the ubiquity of PHP (as far as being installed on such a vast majority of hosts).

The barrier to entry is higher if you want to run a site on something else.

That is the sole reason PHP is as popular as it is and part of the reason why it stays popular and powers so many of the internet's top websites.

Other reasons why it stays popular is that they really have improved it a lot over the years and knowledge on how to run PHP at scale is quite easily available. The community is improving along with the language.

Yes, the standard library is frustrating but that is a pretty minor inconvenience honestly. Every language has a frustrating part of its design. This wart on PHP can be fixed and there are some great recommendations on how to transition to a better std lib in other comments on this OP.

As my family includes many sufferers of anxiety of varying degrees, I've done quite a bit of research on the subject (in addition to personal bouts with mental health issues of that type, going through psychotherapy, etc.) and this James fellow is definitely the exception rather than the rule.

Typically childhood trauma like what the article mentions is much more likely to lead to mental issues (usually something like anxiety + depression) in adulthood.

So yeah, take that one with a grain of salt. It was a silver lining for this guy that he had such a horrible childhood but that is a dangerous part of the thesis to not mention as being very abnormal.

Sorry but this is not very impressive.

That's be great for when you only want computers to be able to solve it!

The pay wall isn't meant to attract people who "rarely read" the New Yorker. Those are the consumers they are OK with losing because they didn't make up an appreciable demographic for their business model anyway.

New Yorker and NYT are two of the only old school media companies whose content I would still pay for. They have some of the best journalism around (NYT for straight news, New Yorker for editorial, long-form, & culture pieces). I think New Yorker's pay wall will probably be a success. I was already prepared to pay for a subscription when the time came.

Having plenty of money and flexible "work" schedules helps achieve those goals (staying good looking, focusing on health, going to the gym a lot).

> is English an abomination?

Yes, yes it is. All natural languages are. They are living, breathing, evolving, organic concepts. They don't have the benefit of being designed and prescribed by an individual or group of individuals like programming languages do.

But good frameworks are essentially collections of commonly needed libraries (to solve whatever problem the framework is concerned with) wrapped in (hopefully thin) unifying API.

FWIW when I was researching Git GUIs for some CLI-averse team members, I came to the same conclusion. Sourcetree is the best and most feature-complete GUI out there for Git (Tower was one of the others I looked at).

Plus it is free.

As a counter-point, the videos were my favorite part but I agree some of them look a little too staged. Possibly blurring them a bit or adding a slightly translucent overlay as another poster suggested could make them less distracting and increase the prominence of the white text overlay.

Just don't throw the baby out with the bath water.

If it ain't broke, don't fix it. (The reasons for why it is "broken" to limit to 3-char in the article aren't good enough to warrant a paradigm shift for a convention almost as old as computing itself).

Of course they aren't entirely subjective! There are objective ways that fonts can be assessed for sure. In fact, there's an entire documentary on Netflix about Helvetica (and titled the same).

"Even if the user doesn't swap out their browser you don't know what you might get."

My point exactly.