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

Type-checked non-empty strings

exploring-better-ways.bellroy.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 51 posts

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#41

Post by gib444 »

saithound wrote: post #18
gib444 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Haskell for a horoscope app is like hiring a mathematician to read tea leaves

Astrology is a mixture of factual verifiable information (such as apparent positions of celestial bodies at the time and location a certain person was born) and random baseless divinations. The "whale" users who account for a disproportionately large percentage of an astrologer's revenue tend to know the factual information surrounding their birth fairly well. An app/astrologer who doesn't get these facts right, even…

Sorry, I forget sometimes that humour doesn't translate well over text lol

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#42

Post by lelanthran »

_doctor_love wrote: post #38
lelanthran wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You can't do good astrology if the underlying math calculations are wrong. So? The people who believe astrology readings would believe them even if the maths is wrong. The readings themselves don't match outcomes anyway, so it's not like the buyers of readings can even tell that the maths was wrong!

The one thing I know from your comment is that you haven't seriously studied astrology.

> The one thing I know from your comment is that you haven't seriously studied astrology.

This is like accusing someone of not seriously studying the ouija board, or tarot cards.

IOW, it's not an insult, it's a compliment.

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#43

Post by _doctor_love »

lelanthran wrote: post #42
_doctor_love wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The one thing I know from your comment is that you haven't seriously studied astrology.

> The one thing I know from your comment is that you haven't seriously studied astrology. This is like accusing someone of not seriously studying the ouija board, or tarot cards. IOW, it's not an insult, it's a compliment.

Oh? So you're over there like super-rational-all-the-time life has no mystery in it?

> IOW, it's not an insult, it's a compliment.

Neither, just an indication that you're comfortable taking a completely dismissive attitude towards things you haven't actually taken the time to study and understand.

I found a great quote from the blog of someone who looks pretty smart:

The more you know, the more you realize you know nothing. --Socrates

Curiously from a blog post titled "Zen and the art of logging" - so clearly this person is open to mystical mumbo-jumbo? After all, does meditation work? Does zen work? Best not to have a strong opinion until you have "gone and seen for yourself."

But you do you.

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#44

Post by lelanthran »

_doctor_love wrote: post #43
lelanthran wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The one thing I know from your comment is that you haven't seriously studied astrology. This is like accusing someone of not seriously studying the ouija board, or tarot cards. IOW, it's not an insult, it's a compliment.

Oh? So you're over there like super-rational-all-the-time life has no mystery in it? > IOW, it's not an insult, it's a compliment. Neither, just an indication that you're comfortable taking a completely dismissive attitude towards things you haven't actually taken the time to study and understand. I found a great quote from the blog of someone who looks pretty smart: The more you know, the more you realize you know n…

> Best not to have a strong opinion until you have "gone and seen for yourself."

I think this is the best part - the only way to know that voodoo is, indeed, voodoo, is to study it.

IOW, what makes you think I am unfamiliar with the various types of voodoo?

Is your mind that tiny that you cannot imagine that someone took a long look into something before dismissing it as voodoo?

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#45

Post by _doctor_love »

lelanthran wrote: post #44
_doctor_love wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh? So you're over there like super-rational-all-the-time life has no mystery in it? > IOW, it's not an insult, it's a compliment. Neither, just an indication that you're comfortable taking a completely dismissive attitude towards things you haven't actually taken the time to study and understand. I found a great quote from the blog of someone who looks pretty smart: The more you know, the more you realize you know n…

> Best not to have a strong opinion until you have "gone and seen for yourself." I think this is the best part - the only way to know that voodoo is, indeed, voodoo, is to study it. IOW, what makes you think I am unfamiliar with the various types of voodoo? Is your mind that tiny that you cannot imagine that someone took a long look into something before dismissing it as voodoo?

Well friend, you sure didn't bring that up to start. Your initial statements gave me a strong sense that you had arbitrarily decided that astrology was bunk without making any intellectual effort.

But if you are now telling me that you have investigated astrology, and - after careful analysis and intellectual struggle - decided that it has nothing to offer? Then you have my respect. Because you actually did the work of going and investigating and making a judgment off your own conscience. If you've done that homework, then all I can do is say thank you for being a critical thinker.

Obviously, the follow-on is that we have a fundamental disagreement here because I have done the same work and concluded that there is signal with astrology. So I have found that it works for me, and pretty well at that. If the opposite is true for you, it is not right for me to try and coerce you to my point of view.

I was musing on your possible reply and remembered this wonderful video from Dr. Richard Hamming. Given our exchange so far, I think you will enjoy it.

How Do We Know What We Know? (If Indeed, We Know It) - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEjt5PerpeY

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#46

Post by anon7000 »

VMG wrote: post #36

Empty strings are usually an artifact of lazy developers paying a minimal "empty" value for a type (just as 0 for numbers). A type like NonEmptyString is a weak defense against that, as a lazy dev can just pass a single space character or something similar.

But that’s not an empty string

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#47

Post by IshKebab »

umpalumpaaa wrote: post #17
flexagoon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've had a Bellroy bag, they're not the most fashionable but super high quality and well thought-out. Just like Haskell code—maybe that's why they like it.

In the backpack community bellroy is often seen as “meh”. Eg. they frequently don’t live up to the guarantees they give and to the quality they promise. Also overpriced.

What brands does the backpack community like the most?

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#48

Post by IshKebab »

_doctor_love wrote: post #39
IshKebab wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think the kinds of people that believe astrology are actually verifying the astronomy though.

False. That's just your opinion. The best astrologers are heavily into astronomy and follow astronomy news very closely.

Fair enough. Feels weird to talk about "the best astrologers"! Like the most skilled witch doctors or elite roulette players.

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#49

Post by VMG »

anon7000 wrote: post #46
VMG wrote: post #36

Empty strings are usually an artifact of lazy developers paying a minimal "empty" value for a type (just as 0 for numbers). A type like NonEmptyString is a weak defense against that, as a lazy dev can just pass a single space character or something similar.

But that’s not an empty string

but just as useless

Re: Type-checked non-empty strings

#50

Post by _doctor_love »

IshKebab wrote: post #48
_doctor_love wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False. That's just your opinion. The best astrologers are heavily into astronomy and follow astronomy news very closely.

Fair enough. Feels weird to talk about "the best astrologers"! Like the most skilled witch doctors or elite roulette players.

Dunno. A lot of Wall St forecasting is honestly worse and less reliable than going to a watch doctor or playing roulette.

I'll confess I'm a little sad at this attitude but people miss out on good stuff all the time.

EDIT: thought about this one a little more. There are definitely better and worse astrologers out there. The good ones will treat your birth chart and transits/progressions as a template for growth, a map to your life. The bad astrologers will condemn you to your fate because of when you were born. There's an enormous world of difference.

Post reply on HN