worksonmymach

Do I need to pay to see that? It is confusing.

Anyway yes calculator apps are a fantastic project:

1. Can be anything from just running a lisp repl and doing (+ 2 2) to a full blown calculation and programming environment like Jupyter!

2. Can explore parsers, ui, ux, interpreters, graphics (if adding charting features for example), stack data structure, floating point arithmetic (or alternative arithmetics like mathematica) and so on. Lots to explore!

3. It is not a money making idea really which is good. So you can focus on the tech and not get an "entrepenuerial seizure" aka "i got an idea it make meeellllliionnnss!"

What are the inconsistencies? None of these tools will be perfect. They don't have backend access to Google's servers. It is all approximate because the long tail is stuff like "buy kubernetes course discnt cide"

But they are great for keyword ideas especially when there is more than one way to search for something.

I'd say Atlassian is good at least in AU not sure about US. You have to work the 40 but thats it. I do more than 40 because I enjoy but no pressure. Also Team Anywhere and as long as you are there for some meetings it can be flexible around kids etc.

Back in the day (2000s) if you were a .NET shop it made sense as the providers for anything else were not as good. And probably you are more likely to get those skills over Postgres. And Postgres was a lot more early.

These days a I am not so sure what the case would be other than legacy or very occasionally some feature only SQL Server has. AD would be a big one.

SQL Server and Oracle too but not being open source is a big minus.

Or thanks follow the sun sres

TIL! I'd love a 1.1.1.4 (plus adblocker) and 1.1.1.5 (plus adblocker plus social media blocker)

Dont pay $20, use the API and pay $2 or less :)

You are right and the biggest asset here are executives and management that can:

1. Think

2. Know what is going on.

3. Effectively get the best from their people.

You want the whole org to engineer the right solution

Any metric that gets abused needs to be found and replaced. Companies should use metrics and be very respectful, curious and also suspicious of them. Even revenue!

I know companies that leave revenue on the table for strategy.

Finally quality is about probabilities. That test you wrote that takes 12s to run and flakes 0.1% adding 10 hours of build time a year ... what is the probability of it detecting a bug and what would the cost of that bug be. You need every engineer to think of that stuff. It is hard stuff to get right or even good.

I worked at places where a religion almost builds. People are hired to maintain those slow expensive unreliable tests! You want to improve that you now have politics!

> If a competitor launches a feature that all your customers want and start to switch to benefit from it, what are you going to do?

I would say this is not that common in SaaS. In that features are important but PMF is key. A feature that drags people over is really a new product. I can't think of an example of the bolt-on killer feature. And by the time you are big enough to run multiple distinct products youd better have good uptime. If you are a startup of course you need features but again finding PMF so you ain't worried about competitors. As a startup you are choosing boring tech and maybe a PaaS to help you do less productioning.

Notice the popularity of k8s, splunk, CI/CD, testing, multi region and so on? Yeah there is big money in being available.

I like this metric. YC doesn't own all of that but that doesn't matter for this exercise. That $458 billion is disjointed. It cannot move as one (when needed) like say Microsoft can. It cannot buy GitHub or OpenAI. But then it wont self distruct either. That is both a plus and minus.

I think it massive improves your odds of a unicorn. But a regular old business aiming for a humble $10m valuation based on profits, of course not.

Sure I'd rather have $1m in FAANG shares than SF real estate over 10 years but maybe I am wrong.

Especially as SF real estate relies on NIMBYism that might change whereas FAANG relies on an enormous brain trust, branding and monopolies.

It needs a culture change. The magic words:

"Our customers prefer the product works over getting a new feature, so let's ensure that at any cost"

Number of features is a dial. You turn that down. You turn the operations (devops) dial up.

There is nothing modern about releasing half arsed shit... we been doing it since the dawn of civilization.

Taking ownership is very much egoless! You are doing that for the team.

Ego would be making sure you got "your" sprint tickets done, did no code reviews, skipped the retro. I think few people do that but they will if Goodhart's Law happens.

That is what makes it very interesting! I think you have said not interesting when you may have meant explainable. If it is boring, who else does this?

If I met a 8 holed donut I'd tear it a new one.

It is critique not advice.

It is legendary. Trying to think is anything else like it? Freemasons? Hells angels? Donald Trump's cabinet?!

Does YC do this consistently though. Even they have to choose battles.

I'd love to know who "wins" in a scaled YC vs. the oceanic tide that is the SP500 and it's capital sucking and brain sucking ways. A Google can stop 10000 potential startups simply with RSUs and cap another 10000 by buying them out (which is kinda good for YC but not really... they'd rather own a chunk of a Google).

Commoncog hits a home run again. This is fascinating. It is more Suits than Suits. Showing how strategy > law when fighting a case. But also the interesting fraternity (not all boys of course) that YC is. Feels like the only other place you would see it is organized crime or corrupt politics where you then owe a favour. But that isn't what it is here. I guess it is about honour.

It can look nice. It is like asking: passive or active voice? It depends what you are writing and what makes sense to the reader.

I do like pipelines though!

1. Change . to |

2. Reverse

Now you have:

words | map read | sum

Or..

$ cat words | map -e read | sum

Oh sir we call that "operational semantics"

To understand "do" you need to understand the underlying >>= and return operators for your monad.

If you can use >>= and return to do it then "do" is indeed a mechanical transformation.

It is like await if you understand JS promises.

The name is very close to SurveyMonkey so tread carefully young padawan.

I haven't seen the AI content. If I have it is vert convincing! Ocassionaly a HN reply is GPT ... but it is obviously is and gets downvoted. AI coding is useful to me to save typing. If I know what I want and the copilot suggests the same I take the suggestion. It is handy.

Twitter is a shitshow but that is biologically generated nonsense! And the hot take engagement is spreading to linkedin leading to borification of these platforms and my minimal use of them.

Sure. Very few elements can be man made in interesting quantites. Matter itself holds an inordinate amount of energy through E=MC2. There is no alchemy that can produce dog poo from hydrogen, for example.

There is also no way to break Dogecoin or other canine related coins.

Therefore dog poo and japanese dog shitcoins fall under the same category as your argument, whatever it is you are arguing.

Atlassian Rovo is this.

The trick is to get people to get their tribal knowledge down in public Slack channels or their docs system.

Recording most Zooms with AI summaries may help.

Hard to avoid some tribal knowledge. To be free of it you need full reference documentation and tutorials for everything you do. And to update it as you go. And to realize what might be missing from a paedagogical perspective. Not easy and probably not possible for a commercial operation. And not necessary. 80-20 rule applies.