composer · HackerTrans

> An estimation has two components: location and uncertainty

ReRe's Law of Repetition and Redundancy [5] could benefit from a refinement that accounts for the inverse relationship between width-of-delivery-window and certainty-of-delivery-date... maybe:

  A programmer can accurately estimate the schedule for only the repeated and the redundant. Yet,
  A programmer's job is to automate the repeated and the redundant. Thus,
  A programmer delivering to an estimated or predictable schedule is...
  Not doing their job (or is redundant).

[5] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25826476

composer

5 年前discuss

    oathtool -w1 --base32 --totp $secret

Add a space before the command depending on your shell. Some shells will keep your secret out of history logs.

composer

5 年前discuss

I like this argument and would like to strengthen it in sligthly diffent dimension...

Every time I hear/read a "net offset" justification like in the greatgrandparent comment my brain only hears

  I'm gonna sell heroin/meth/crack to fund a rehab clinic; 
  AND 
  if more persons are rehabbed than addicted 
  then the whole endeavour is a good thing;
  AND 
  I am a good person; call me "one of the good ones.

The point of the analogy is to share the perspective that "net offsetting" isn't automatically a good thing. Many times the fundamental nature of the initial thing to be offset, in this case advertising, must be given primacy over anything else.

Some see the nature of advertising as neutral, some even see it as good, some see it it as evil. I see it as too impractical to wield as intended; rare-times good, some-times neutral and most-times bad.

Although we can measure air water and noise pollutions, we still have wild disagreements over how much to allow. Given that we suck at measuring the mental pollution produced by advertising-based business models, it is natural that disagreement is even greater over mental pollution.

Where is the startup that shows folks the pollution-free mental spaces that they didn't know they wanted_needed, but that they will never let-go once experienced. Sadly, most minds are limited to imagining the same sad choices jefftk listed. I for one choose to believe that people exist who see how to "fund the web" sans advertising. To them I leave this future message: "Hurry up dammit. We need you. The jefftk's of this world are making the most ungodly of big messes."

composer

5 年前discuss

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19249822

composer

5 年前discuss

ReRe's Law of Repetition and Redundancy [4] somehow does not apply to you:

  A programmer can accurately estimate the schedule for only the repeated and the redundant. Yet,
  A programmer's job is to automate the repeated and the redundant. Thus,
  A programmer delivering to an estimated or predictable schedule is...
  Not doing their job (or is redundant).

[4] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25797519

composer

6 年前discuss

ReRe's Law of Repetition and Redundancy [3] agrees with you:

  A programmer can accurately estimate the schedule for only the repeated and the redundant. Yet,
  A programmer's job is to automate the repeated and the redundant. Thus,
  A programmer delivering to an estimated or predictable schedule is...
  Not doing their job (or is redundant).

[3] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=192

composer

6 年前discuss

> $2.5 Trillion every year

Actually it will cost $3T ONCE, one-time.

Actually the USA has already paid for a UBI from just its pandemic-related stimulus alone, e.g. CARES Act.

The way to achieve an perpetual ongoing UBI with just a one time expediture of $3T is... drum roll... Stipulate that all payments must be spent on basics & essentials. AND then issue the payments & handle collection digitally/electronically like with debit cards. I sit astounded that the country's best leaders have not proposed a "basics only" amendment.

composer

6 年前discuss

That is also a good idea because people are motivated more to act when something goes wrong; and a close second is when they are excited to share a good discovery. The DefaultReviews [1] gist may offer some guidance:

"...rating by default is the equivalent of saying "everything is okay". That rating is made without you having to lift a finger. You only have to lift a finger to change it to "awesome" or to "sucks" or to add a elaboration for others to read."

Also, the final section of DefaultReviews [1] may also help solve your inevitable problem with faked reviews. Pull requests welcome.

[1] https://gist.github.com/iL3D/59df64947d42828d848ebfc1651a312...

composer

6 年前discuss

Similar to floatrock's proposol [1] of turning reviews upside down... Imagine being able to track broken-ness (when, how, why) in the field across all products of the same model. And doing so for each product you own. "Default reviews" [2] is one way to do it. Pull requests welcome.

1 upside down - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24710832

2 default reviews - https://gist.github.com/iL3D/59df64947d42828d848ebfc1651a312...

comments