Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

So long, and thanks for all the bytes

chethaase.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 160 posts

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#81

Post by doesnt_know »

treprinum wrote: post #47

I always wanted to program, to create great things, got really good at it, but most of the time I was overtaken by folks playing politics that only used tech as a stepping stone to something they always wanted to do but only tech gave them financial resources to do that.

That's the system we live in. Feels pretty natural that people will optimise for the effort/$ ratio if they have the power to do so. Sitting in my home AC'd office, making a computer do things and getting paid more then basically every "essential service" is probably the sweetest deal outside of being born into a wealthy family.

I personally love to code, I literally do it in my free time to solve my own little problems and/or just to learn, but I don't resent people who are only doing it for the money or because it's easier than most alternatives.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#82

Post by wrs »

ghaff wrote: post #72
chaboud wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That must have been an amazing ride. Note: in my opinion, a small, lean, focused team is the right way to build an OS. I haven't seen the "throw an army at it" approach succeed for building the core of an OS or platform, as it becomes almost impossible to keep coherence in the system. And, yeah, that GMSCore joke is too real.

Maybe? How many people worked on the core of Windows NT? On a number of the big Unixes? Various minicomputer OSs? What you probably do need is a chief architect--like Cutler in the NT case--to keep everyone lined up.

Depending on your definition of “core”, I think the cores of those were indeed implemented by a handful of people. Read “Showstopper” for the Windows NT story, for example, with a small gang of ex-DEC engineers putting the basic kernel abstractions in place.

Of course, the full functionality of the system comes after lots more people build functionality on top of that core. Which is exactly why it’s important for that core to be coherent, powerful, and well engineered.

You can have the best chief architect in the world, but if everyone’s building on sand you’re going to get a crappy system. Whereas if the core of the system is solid, it will guide people into doing things better even without an architect.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#83

Post by breather »

musicale wrote: post #79
breather wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Art? Yes, of course! I have no clue what you're referring to with tech, though. Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. Not sure what you're referring to with science at all.

> Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. What about: - curiosity (much of science, mathematics, etc.) - artistic expression (musical instruments, demoscene) - fortunate accidents (penicillin) - just tinkering around (all sorts of inventions) - play and fun (many non-commercial computer games) - communication…

I'm as keen to wax poetic about the non-economic potential of technology as the next person, but I'm not deluding myself into thinking that was why the technology was developed in the first place.

Also, a military advantage is an economic one, there's no real difference between the concepts.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#84

Post by latency-guy2 »

breather wrote: post #66
noncoml wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tech for tech's sake helps nobody If it wasn’t for science, art and tech for their own sake we would still be on the trees gathering bananas

Art? Yes, of course! I have no clue what you're referring to with tech, though. Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. Not sure what you're referring to with science at all.

I think you value "art" too much, and think too little of "tech".

It's also not confusing to me what the other person is saying, maybe you can clarify what your misunderstandings are before anyone can address them.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#86

Post by wrs »

breather wrote: post #83
musicale wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Throughout history development of tech has almost always driven by seeking economic leverage. I'm sure there are exceptions but I can't think of any. What about: - curiosity (much of science, mathematics, etc.) - artistic expression (musical instruments, demoscene) - fortunate accidents (penicillin) - just tinkering around (all sorts of inventions) - play and fun (many non-commercial computer games) - communication…

I'm as keen to wax poetic about the non-economic potential of technology as the next person, but I'm not deluding myself into thinking that was why the technology was developed in the first place. Also, a military advantage is an economic one, there's no real difference between the concepts.

So you’re saying all of technology is the result of saying “we could make money if we had a thing that did X”, and none of it is the result of “we found a way to do X because we thought it would be cool.”

If nothing else, you just dismissed most of mathematics and basic physics.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#87

Post by Klonoar »

treprinum wrote: post #47

I always wanted to program, to create great things, got really good at it, but most of the time I was overtaken by folks playing politics that only used tech as a stepping stone to something they always wanted to do but only tech gave them financial resources to do that.

That’s the game, yeah.

Sometimes you have to do shit you don’t want to do in order to accomplish what you do want to do. It’s on you.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#88

Post by FpUser »

raphlinus wrote: post #20
adamgordonbell wrote: post #6

Chet's book on the early days of Android is super interesting. Lots of crazy OS building stories. He must have interviewed 50 people who worked on the first couple releases of Android. I had him share parts of that story on the podcast and result is one of my favorite episodes. I always thought of Android as, of course it succeeded, it was a big google project. But the story is far more interesting. They were somewha…

I joined Android in April 2012. Looking back, at that time Android was incredibly lean for what it was accomplishing. The entire Frameworks team reported to one manager, and we would fit in a medium size conference room. That included all of UI toolkit and the bulk of the Java APIs an app would call into, including Binder. (Networking, phone, graphics, Bluetooth, etc were other teams, but we worked closely together.…

>"until I left in late 2016 to join Fuchsia, largely because I was impatient to develop in Rust"

Shows how different people are. I only care what I am developing. I have my preferences but if generally language is the last thing I care about bar some pathological cases.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#89

Post by dart200 »

breather wrote: post #57
treprinum wrote: post #47

I always wanted to program, to create great things, got really good at it, but most of the time I was overtaken by folks playing politics that only used tech as a stepping stone to something they always wanted to do but only tech gave them financial resources to do that.

Tech for tech's sake helps nobody. Politics is a fact of nearly every facet of life—you can accept this and play the game or accept that you're in the backseat. The worst people in the world already know this and run our industry. There's no reason we have to accept them.

> The worst people in the world already know this and run our industry. There's no reason we have to accept them.

tbh until we change the way to go about politics, or collective decision making, this isn't going to change.

Re: So long, and thanks for all the bytes

#90

Post by monero-xmr »

chaboud wrote: post #60
raphlinus wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I joined Android in April 2012. Looking back, at that time Android was incredibly lean for what it was accomplishing. The entire Frameworks team reported to one manager, and we would fit in a medium size conference room. That included all of UI toolkit and the bulk of the Java APIs an app would call into, including Binder. (Networking, phone, graphics, Bluetooth, etc were other teams, but we worked closely together.…

That must have been an amazing ride. Note: in my opinion, a small, lean, focused team is the right way to build an OS. I haven't seen the "throw an army at it" approach succeed for building the core of an OS or platform, as it becomes almost impossible to keep coherence in the system. And, yeah, that GMSCore joke is too real.

Small, lean, focused team is the correct way to build any massive undertaking in software. Maybe not in sending people to the moon, but in building consumer software.
Post reply on HN