A Whole New World (2012)(destroyallsoftware.com)
destroyallsoftware.com
A Whole New World (2012)
https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks/a-whole-new-world
7 comments
Because it doesn't exist, which is the whole idea of the video. You should watch it
Okay. But that’s worse. You do get how that’s worse, right?
A shame we don't have spoiler tags here, because I honestly do not want to spoil the talk for others who do take the time to watch it.
The point of the talk is not the project he is launching, he is making a much deeper and more interesting point about the entire software industry. Personally I think the presentation format he uses to address the issue is highly effective, and would recommend people take the 20min (less if you speed up the video) sitting down at lunch some day to watch the video from start to finish.
The point of the talk is not the project he is launching, he is making a much deeper and more interesting point about the entire software industry. Personally I think the presentation format he uses to address the issue is highly effective, and would recommend people take the 20min (less if you speed up the video) sitting down at lunch some day to watch the video from start to finish.
I criticize the web page for being clickbaity and cryptic, but you go all “It’s supposed to be cryptic!”. I swear, it’s like listening to fans of Lost trying to explain why it’s fun watching a TV show where nothing makes any sense but continually hints at things making sense later, but it never does.
A reasonable person can explain things in a straightforward manner. If someone instead chooses to be cryptic and veiled, perhaps in a misguided attempt at being theatrical, they open themselves up to criticism. Which I provided. Quite reasonably too, I thought, since the text preferred to be cryptic and clickbaity instead of explaining anything.
If someone really prefers to be theatrical (like in actual theater or movies), they could still preface it with a reasonable explanation that they can’t give away the twist in the synopsis.
A reasonable person can explain things in a straightforward manner. If someone instead chooses to be cryptic and veiled, perhaps in a misguided attempt at being theatrical, they open themselves up to criticism. Which I provided. Quite reasonably too, I thought, since the text preferred to be cryptic and clickbaity instead of explaining anything.
If someone really prefers to be theatrical (like in actual theater or movies), they could still preface it with a reasonable explanation that they can’t give away the twist in the synopsis.
It's a 20 minute lunch talk at Strangeloop.
Lighten up Francis.
Lighten up Francis.
what is "a company that produces screencasts"? How does it make money? Is it a non-profit?
But then he doesn't link to, or even name the project. You have to watch the video to find out, I guess? Pass.