I’d like to tinker with that font, it burns my eyes to try and read the words styled like that, maybe that’s the intent?
I adore the font and the vibe. Maybe age or something but I love it.
Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
381–390 of 396 posts
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#382Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Most is software is written using a some text editor." What an astute fucking observation you've made, mate! And so it happens, that webdevs and web infra people (which is the extent of your understanding of "high quality shit") tend to use unixes and consequently vim/emacs as their text editor. No fucking way! Perhaps, you can even tell just by looking at a piece of code - oh, this is beautiful, clean and clear, bu…
I'm not making shit up on the spot nor am I attributing any metrics to vim or emacs specifically or how riced should they be, I'm simply telling you the facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will". Most software is not written using "some" text editor, I would love to see maniacs writing kernel patches in notepad.exe or nano. Tools are tools -…
> facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will".
Your line of reasoning is something akin to - there are some skilled programmers that have shipped high quality software and wrote the code using lubed mechanical switches.
Therefore there MUST be something about lubing your switches and obsessing over clacks and thocks that contributes to quality of software somehow.
It's some weird bizzaro cargo cult reasoning.
Unix/webdevs often tend to use vim/emacs -> therefore this absolutely must contribute to the quality of software somehow (it has to!)
Except there are absolutely no basis for this claim, as there are high quality software that is written using neither vim nor emacs nor lubed mechanical switches.
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#383Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#384I think the author has a point, but his examples are bad. He talks about mouse sensitivity, windows manager, keyboard switches, and vscode. All those things were made to be tweaked . He's not so much exploring as he is playing with a toy the way it was intended. The stickiest learning comes from getting things wrong, and that happens when you're using things the way you're not supposed to. For example disassembling a…
> For example disassembling a microwave Getting this wrong will not be a learning experience, because it will kill you. This is an incredibly dangerous thing to do and should only be done by people who already know what they're doing. That's not just a tangential tidbit -- you don't learn well when you are completely out of your depth. You learn well when you are right at the edge of your ability and understanding. T…
Yes, disassembling and tinkering with microwave is almost the only easily available thing I would not recommend at all because it seems so ordinary but actual danger is way too high and hidden. Even if you know exactly the dangers, it takes only one distracted move, just being tired or too complacent to end really badly. Like even some medium time disconnected and expectedly safe units can have real nasty shock in them when discharge resistor is faulty, that failure mode does not usually kill but not recommended.
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#385Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah, this is not true. This is the type of argument that people make when they insist that "no one actually likes IPAs and they just want to get drunk quicker."
"Yeah, this is not true." Well, I reckon whether one considers that statement true or not depends on who one is (as I'll explain). Coffee, tea, chocolate and cola all contain mixtures of methylxanthines of which caffeine is but one, others include theophylline, theobromine† and paraxanthine to mention a few. What's relevant here is not only that all are psychoactive to varying degrees but also they are bitter substan…
You seem to be in violent agreement with my point, because what I was getting at is that you drink coffee for the taste, and I drink IPAs for the taste.
Even though there's a popular strain of edgy internet bro logic that "no one actually likes X, they only drink/eat/wear/consume it because Y."
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#386Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, people like IPAs because they taste good to them. I have never heard anyone complementing the flavorings of Pabst (yuk), Schaefer (worst beer I ever tasted), or Milwaukee's Best (aka The Beast). Same with Old English 800 or Colt 45, they're awful but get you drunk for cheap.
As a former home brewer, when I taste a ton of hops, the first thing that pops into my mind is "oh they screwed up the batch" because a fistfull of hops was a way to wipe out bad flavors and save material.
As a home brewer, just because one person tried to salvage crap by dumping hops into the boil does not automatically make all hoppy styles crap. Perhaps more forgiving for less-experienced brewers, but doing them well still takes skill.
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#387Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not making shit up on the spot nor am I attributing any metrics to vim or emacs specifically or how riced should they be, I'm simply telling you the facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will". Most software is not written using "some" text editor, I would love to see maniacs writing kernel patches in notepad.exe or nano. Tools are tools -…
> facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will". Your line of reasoning is something akin to - there are some skilled programmers that have shipped high quality software and wrote the code using lubed mechanical switches. Therefore there MUST be something about lubing your switches and obsessing over clacks and thocks that contributes to quality…
> > facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will".
> Your line of reasoning is something akin to - there are some skilled programmers that have shipped high quality software and wrote the code using lubed mechanical switches.
No, I can second that the claim of "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form" has been pretty solidly invalidated by GP. You may be able to claim many other things, and some of them might be true, but that point above won't be.
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#388Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a former home brewer, when I taste a ton of hops, the first thing that pops into my mind is "oh they screwed up the batch" because a fistfull of hops was a way to wipe out bad flavors and save material.
As a home brewer, just because one person tried to salvage crap by dumping hops into the boil does not automatically make all hoppy styles crap. Perhaps more forgiving for less-experienced brewers, but doing them well still takes skill.
It's one of those things so common and spoken about among brew clubs that I saw it as an established truth. We always gave the PNW brewers crap for over reliance on hops. In the time and place I was at, porters and stouts ruled.
The hardest thing to brew at home is actually a pale ale or a light lager. You can't hide any mistakes in those because they are 'sex in a canoe' beers.
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#389Earlier quoted context omitted.
> facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will". Your line of reasoning is something akin to - there are some skilled programmers that have shipped high quality software and wrote the code using lubed mechanical switches. Therefore there MUST be something about lubing your switches and obsessing over clacks and thocks that contributes to quality…
> > facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will". > Your line of reasoning is something akin to - there are some skilled programmers that have shipped high quality software and wrote the code using lubed mechanical switches. No, I can second that the claim of "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form" has been pretty solidly inv…
> has been pretty solidly invalidated by GP
How exactly has it been invalidated?
By pointing out that SOME widely used software (mostly web/web infra with unix heritage) has been written using vim/emacs as the text editor?
Now, you can find endless sea of garbage software on github that is written using riced vim/emacs setups - would you therefore conclude that using vim/emacs leads to garbage software?
The only thing you can conclude here is that to write software (either good or bad) you generally speaking need a keyboard and a text editor.
Claiming vim/emacs leads to or directly contributes to "quality software" is the same and about as meaningful as saying that keyboards and text editors lead to "quality software".
Cargo cult insanity.
Re: Tinkering is a way to acquire good taste
#390Earlier quoted context omitted.
> > facts to counter-argue your point of: "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form, neither it ever will". > Your line of reasoning is something akin to - there are some skilled programmers that have shipped high quality software and wrote the code using lubed mechanical switches. No, I can second that the claim of "hasn't ever led to quality software in any shape or form" has been pretty solidly inv…
> has been pretty solidly invalidated by GP How exactly has it been invalidated? By pointing out that SOME widely used software (mostly web/web infra with unix heritage) has been written using vim/emacs as the text editor? Now, you can find endless sea of garbage software on github that is written using riced vim/emacs setups - would you therefore conclude that using vim/emacs leads to garbage software? The only thin…
> would you therefore conclude that using vim/emacs leads to garbage software?
I cannot conclude that "it leads to garbage software", but I can definitely conclude that "it has ever led to garbage software" at least once, and in some "shape or form".
> Claiming vim/emacs leads to or directly contributes to "quality software" is the same
This (or the alluded opposite) was not the original claim. The original claim was the total impossibility of vim/emacs to have ever led to quality software, in any shape or form. That is the only claim being contested here.