The Programmers' Stone
beautiful-programmers-stone.netlify.com
The Programmers' Stone
1–10 of 11 posts
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#2Hello HN!
I've seen the programmers stone website a few times here and I've done a small redesign to make it more readable for the modern web (both on desktops and mobile devices).
The website is still lightweight and doesn't use any javascript, and I think some of you will appreciate that.
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#3The first chapter does not reflect much empathy for the Japanese.
The authors could have made their point without showing such blatant disrespect.
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#4The first chapter does not reflect much empathy for the Japanese. The authors could have made their point without showing such blatant disrespect.
I don't see any disrespect in there?
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#5The first chapter does not reflect much empathy for the Japanese. The authors could have made their point without showing such blatant disrespect.
I'm not sure where empathy belongs in a scholarly work, or how it relates to disrespect? This is an excellent work.
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#6Hello HN! I've seen the programmers stone website a few times here and I've done a small redesign to make it more readable for the modern web (both on desktops and mobile devices). The website is still lightweight and doesn't use any javascript, and I think some of you will appreciate that.
Thank you! I see it for the first time and I’m hooked(and love no JS policy)!
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#7The first chapter does not reflect much empathy for the Japanese. The authors could have made their point without showing such blatant disrespect.
I don't see any disrespect in there?
Probably they are referring to things like this snippet:
Recognising the importance of mapping suggests another way of looking at what has happened here. Mapping can certainly be reawakened by trauma. One possible way to traumatise a person might be to:
1. Nuke them. Twice.
2. Rip apart their rigid, predictable feudal society.
3. Tell them the invader will be coming around tomorrow.
4. Leave them nothing for supper.
To eat tonight, this person is going to have to reawaken his ability to be imaginative.
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#8Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see any disrespect in there?
Probably they are referring to things like this snippet: Recognising the importance of mapping suggests another way of looking at what has happened here. Mapping can certainly be reawakened by trauma. One possible way to traumatise a person might be to: 1. Nuke them. Twice. 2. Rip apart their rigid, predictable feudal society. 3. Tell them the invader will be coming around tomorrow. 4. Leave them nothing for supper.…
I see how this could upset some, but whether or not it is either empathetic or disrespectful is arguable.
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#9Hello HN! I've seen the programmers stone website a few times here and I've done a small redesign to make it more readable for the modern web (both on desktops and mobile devices). The website is still lightweight and doesn't use any javascript, and I think some of you will appreciate that.
This is awesome, thanks!
If the paragraphs were set to wrap, I could actually read it on my phone when zooming in.
I could zoom in and scroll back and forth on each line, but that's worse than squinting.
Do you have time to do this? If not, will you accept pull requests, and or is the source available to contribute to?
Re: The Programmers' Stone
#10If they're going to build their entire site around the "packers vs mappers" metaphor, they need to do way more to explain and justify it than this:
> What is presented as socially conditioned conventional thinking (called packing) is based on action. To be a good bricklayer, a packer must know what a bricklayer does.
> To understand what programmers really do, an alternative strategy of thinking (called mapping) is necessary
The reason they don't put any effort into describing what "mapping" and "packing" mean when applied to thinking, is that all they really mean is "smart (like us)" and "dumb (like everyone around us)". Packers are compared to illiterates, they're slow, they don't try to do better, they're illogical. Packing = things we don't like.
Compare to useful categorizing like "lumpers and splitters" in taxonomy, where both ends of the spectrum are respectable and worth keeping in mind as heuristics.