atdixon

This is intentionally experimental and dev-first, not a startup pitch. Games are uploaded as static artifacts and run fully sandboxed in iframes (allow-scripts only) with no cookies or network access.

One unexpectedly hard/fun problem: making infinite scroll work well with lots of <canvas> on mobile (solved by caching/reusing iframes)

I'm not a game developer but writing/porting the (low-fi) reference games on the site took a few hours per game and reminded me how much fun programming can be.

Happy to answer questions or dig into the tech if ppl are curious.

One in which Mary steps out of her room, sees a rose, and absolutely nothing new is added to her understandings.

She already had it all sorted out in her study. In many people’s understanding of “naturalism” that wouldn’t be any surprise.

But that’s not this world.

I think you’re missing the argument.

We can easily assign words to things we know exist. That’s not the issue.

When we define things (like “naturalism”) we are invoking symbols and their semantics, all the stuff Mary presumably has access to in her room.

In her room, Mary already understands subjective experience, the brain mechanics behind it, etc.

The realization that there is more outside of Mary’s room suggests that our conceptualizations are limited / not accurate.

If that’s the agreed case how can anyone cling to a universal “naturalism” with a straight face?

With Mary’s room, haven’t we already accepted that formal statements are incomplete - and therefore would be silly to call universal?

Would you ever consider building/porting this to nostr?

https://nostr.com/

Personal tasks with estimates and focused on “local first”/desktop usage.

The converse of this is that good, wise developers are going to (ultimately) _demand_ Clojure.

What I mean by this:

I was a Java programmer for years and increasingly started writing code in a more functional, immutable, dynamic style with the occasional need for meta-programming -- for the sheer need of being more productive and writing more robust code.

Yes, you can write functional, immutable, dynamic, code in Java and do meta-programming in Java!

It's just somewhat cumbersome and prickly.

Enter: Clojure.

I've seen many an 'unwise' programmer make just as much a mess of Java systems as people are suggesting they've seen in Clojure projects. It may be simply that Java slows you/your team down enough so that the messes of unwise programmers are just made more slowly.

But one wonders if this is really a win: you're probably also delivering your business value more slowly, as well.

:thinking-face:

Social Processes and Proofs of Theorems and Programs

Even rigorous mathematics requires social processes to become 'reliable', ie truthful.

I must have discovered the same approach as this author.

I stopped any kind of thinking about it and focused on observing myself drive to the gym, get in the pool, do the strokes, etc.

If my verbal ("thinking") centers of my brain needed to say something I would only let them describe what I was doing ("You are driving to the gym", "you are putting your swimsuit on", etc.)

Never did I let any other "thinking" or "reasoning" enter the picture. It was all observation. I was able to keep an exercise routine for years this way.

---

I think her post fails in the last section "Do the easiest part first". This is too much thinking, reasoning and I think will backfire. She should delete this section. I think this idea is hard for people to understand. You want ZERO REASONING to come into the picture when the time comes, not even a shred. Only pure observation of you doing the task.

You or someone you know may very well become aware of (i.e., _come to know_) what are your personal defects (insecurities, unproductive behavioral predispositions, etc) -- but this is in no way _at all_ means that you will be able to _change_.