81–90 of 418 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As a marathon runner, people sometimes ask "How does a person run for 3 hours O.O" and well it's about the same as running for 5 minutes except you don't stop. Simple != easy
Strength training is equally simple. Just keep increasing the weight you lift.
All life is just cytosine, guanine, adenine, and thymine.
Computers are just infinite tape marked out into squares... (Turing machine). A pyramid is just a stack of cubic rocks.
This is funny, but it's like saying "Math is basically pluses and minuses". I see coding as playing with hardware without having to use soldering iron.
Maybe math is just equations and sets.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All you really need is `mov`. https://github.com/xoreaxeaxeax/movfuscator https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7EEoWg6Ekk
SUBLEQ :) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-instruction_set_computer
That first reply is so funny to me because it hits too close to home https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1466940940229046273 The more I do this, the more I gravitate towards the simple things.
“Before I learned the art, a punch was just a punch, and a kick, just a kick. After I learned the art, a punch was no longer a punch, a kick, no longer a kick. Now that I understand the art, a punch is just a punch and a kick is just a kick.”
That first reply is so funny to me because it hits too close to home https://twitter.com/nice_byte/status/1466940940229046273 The more I do this, the more I gravitate towards the simple things.
Despite being a joke, I know it's the "Ha Ha Only Serious" [0] sort. I can't help but think this is severely biased by the trends of "enterprise software," where you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature, Jedi-like way of thinking about programming, like the meme suggests. (And, consequently, you spend no less time debugging hairy, nest…
For assimilation to happen, the state-of-the-art solution also has to result in a net gain over the existing solution, and the higher the differential in complexity between the two, the bigger that gain has to be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Despite being a joke, I know it's the "Ha Ha Only Serious" [0] sort. I can't help but think this is severely biased by the trends of "enterprise software," where you eventually "give up", and clock your 9–5 writing if+for making a fine living, but erroneously pass that off as a mature, Jedi-like way of thinking about programming, like the meme suggests. (And, consequently, you spend no less time debugging hairy, nest…
>I have no beef with if+for, but a large part of the reason they're "goto tools", if you will, is because industry is slow to assimilate many state-of-the-art ideas, sometimes by as much as 40 years. For assimilation to happen, the state-of-the-art solution also has to result in a net gain over the existing solution, and the higher the differential in complexity between the two, the bigger that gain has to be.