steven_noble
steven_noble on Hacker News
while I think of it, also "The Structure Of Scientific Revolutions"
"How To Make A Good Script Great", "Slow Motion: Changing Men, Changing Masculinities", "Cryptonomicon", "1984", "Lord Of The Rings"
Genuine question: is NPR always that sloppy? Because the first screen in that visual article claimed that a particular region is experiencing unprecedented growth. Which is a massive claim, given all of history, but also impossible to fact check if the authors don't even say whether they mean population growth or economic growth or something else. The second screen was even dumber. I gave up after that.
true - let's see if i can edit the post
Posted by
steven_noble on Wednesday May 13, 2026 @07:38PM
from the en.wikipedia.org dept.
Seems more relevant than ever given half the things we discuss on here...
"Helium production"? I'm assuming they're not running a fusion reactor...
Meanwhile, even The Economist's subeditor does not understand the difference between "who" and "whom".
Arts Degree -> Tech Journalist -> Self-Employed Self-Taught Consultant -> Professional Software Developer
Your life partner should be someone you trust and admire and who feels that way about you. Any other criterion is a recipe for disappointment.
Mechanical pencil and a day planner
The article’s headline says it’s a new technique. The article’s body does not really say this.
Also, "Man's Search for Meaning" by Viktor Frankl
"What You Can Change and What You Can't" by Martin Seligman
"Radio Birdman: Retaliate First", by Murray Engleheart. First full history of the pioneering Australian proto-punk outfit.
BTW, "whom" is an object, "who" is a subject.
The main reason I know for using those switches is when running Chrome headlessly for automated browser tests. I'm sure they have other uses I haven't come across. The fact that the flags are specific to the version of Chrome you are running is not a big deal when you typically specify the version in your test harness anyway.
Because "economic Marxism" is Marxism, and "cultural Marxism" is not Marxism
https://i94bar.com/Mostly focused on the sound that was retrospectively called 'proto-punk' when it emerged in the US (MC5, Stooges, Patti Smith, etc) and Australia (especially Radio Birdman) and elsewhere just before punk.
But it's a sound that you can still hear in many bands today that were born long after that era. Especially in bands like The Hellacopters, etc.
Most of mine are listed here already. Four are worth adding: fusion, for audio, pixelmator, for images, Kitty, the terminal, and Alfred, which is like raycast.
Mostly politics, where I have learned to stop predicting anything that can't be directly seen -- especially the future. For example:
1. Trump wins. I firmly predicted the opposite. To be fair, most polls predicted the same. But the lesson is to be less certain about the future.
2. No chemical weapon found in Iraq. I firmly predicted the opposite. To be fair, when that event unfolded, it was not that long since the world had last seen Iraq actually use chemical weapons against Kurdish insurgents. But the lesson is to be less certain about anything that can't be directly seen.
Personally, I find it hard to beat Vim.
But if you are looking for a free and flexible GUI alternative, maybe give Joplin a go?
1.2 hours per day? Week? Lifetime?
Was this article written by AI?
(The grammatical flaw in the headline is the only thing making me believe it might have been written by a human.)
"The Trusted Advisor" by David Maister. (It's more about what makes you sellable than sales. And it's more than being a great engineer that makes you sellable.)
"Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World" by Emma Marris.
Can't recommend it enough.
Also:
- "The Battle of Midway", by Craig Symonds
- "Asperger's Children: The Origins of Autism in Nazi Vienna" by Edith Sheffer
I'm pretty sure that advocating censorship, as you are doing, is starting a political conversation on HN
"The Language Instinct", by language psychologist Steven Pinker, gave me a new way of thinking about the old nature/nurture issue.
The easy solution has always been to say "Nature? Nurture? It's a bit of both". But really, that invites the response: "Both nature and nurture? Sure. Of course. But both of them in what way?"
In the case of language it's really interesting. It seems that biologically, we are very very strongly primed to learn language ("nature"). And to learn it in certain ways and at certain life stages.
But of course, at the same, the language or languages that we learn are incredibly diverse, and these differences do not map in any way to the physical differences between our bodies ("nurture").
So, in the case of human language, that's "the how" for how nature and nurture come together. Maybe it applies to other areas too where the nature/nurture debate still rages.