degobah
Location: San Francisco
Remote: Open to it
Willing to relocate: No
Technologies: Full-stack web apps, React, Typescript, .NET/C#, ASP.NET, Electron, Bash, Python, Database design, SQL Server/Postgres, AWS/GCP
Résumé/CV: https://gist.github.com/tomvonclef/a0bbff6e222416a81380d324c0282a76
Email: [email protected]"If you look back years ago in the 1920s and the 1930s, they said global cooling will kill the world. We have to do something. Then they said global warming will kill the world, but then it started getting cooler. So now they just call it climate change because that way they can't miss. Climate change because if it goes higher or lower, whatever the hell happens, there's climate change. It's the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world, in my opinion. Climate change, no matter what happens, you're involved in that. No more global warming, no more global cooling. All of these predictions made by the United Nations and many others, often for bad reasons, were wrong. They were made by stupid people that have cost their country's fortunes and given those same countries no chance for success."
https://rollcall.com/factbase/trump/transcript/donald-trump-...
"In 2020, requests from both the Trump White House and the Biden campaign were received and honored."
The difference is that the Trump White House was the executive office of the federal govt making requests, while Biden was a private citizen.
Sounds like you're biased in your media assessment.
> jQuery and its cousins are great, and by all means use them if it makes it easier to develop your application.
> If you're developing a library on the other hand, please take a moment to consider if you actually need jQuery as a dependency.
Literally the first thing youmightnotneedjquery.com says is:
> jQuery and its cousins are great, and by all means use them if it makes it easier to develop your application.
> If you're developing a library on the other hand, please take a moment to consider if you actually need jQuery as a dependency.
> But beside this historical excursion, what are the reasons that I use Free Pascal in my personal projects?
* Netflix had a bug in their code.
* But Express.js should throw an error when multiple route handlers are given identical paths.
* Also, Express.js should use a different data structure to store route handlers. EDIT: HN commentors disagree.
* node.js CPU Flame Graphs (http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2014-09-17/node-flame-graph...) are awesome!
1. Rails is slow
2. Dynamic languages are bad
> If you acknowledge there is skill in succeeding (with a company, say, or in overcoming a bad habit, or tending your goals and beliefs, perhaps even to train more rigorously for that high jump), and that these things are moral or at least not immoral, the author's argument falls apart.
His thesis or argument is that the books and articles of his day on "success" are mainly rubbish. It is not to say that the word "success" is actually no good, or that trying to succeed at some individual thing is not good. A main point of his is that there are individual skills to succeed at specific things, but not an all-encompassing skill of "success."
I will concede that Chesterton sees people whose main mission in life is to make money as greedy, because he strongly, strongly believes that money doesn't make a person happy.
His FIRST criticism is that the books and articles about success are vague (i.e. lacking in specific actions) and ineffective (not actually useful).
> This piece is a deeply anachronistic
You are aware this is an essay from around 1908?
Just how friggin' much is he supposed to do in one short essay?
There are so many things wrong with that statement that I don't know where to begin. Maybe with the question, Where does he say that?
You're not making your case very well.
The two passages you excerpt are about useless vagueness in "success" books/articles. You are completely missing the point of the passage about "success in jumping," which is that "success" books and articles of the time (around 1908), are vague pump-you-up bullshit that any idiot could write.
Chesterton never argues that all "rich people are avaricious." Chesterton believes money and prestige are not really worth putting a person's main passion and energy into, which is what the Success books (circa 1908) seem to advocate. This essay is mainly a criticism of particular Success books and the Success idea; it is NOT an essay about getting rich or about limiting beliefs. It is also a criticism of the worship of rich and powerful men.
Chesterton never "declare[s] that limitations of the self are simply not worth considering."
You don't seem to realize that the this essay goes much deeper that criticizing how to be successful, but the very idea of "success" itself.
flot: the original uses jQuery
flotr: inspired by flot uses Prototype
flotr2: branch of flotr no dependency