Paul's point would make sense if his case was about greater verisimilitude, which might sound like splitting hairs, but is an important phenomenon in philosophy. Many dictators have sounded good but their core messages were abhorrent.

In the same vein, there are thousands of fiction books, some more brilliantly written than others, but nothing in that spectrum makes any of their stories any more real or true.

> I know it's true from writing.

Well, some things just appear to be true. I admire Paul's writings and I believe his honesty in trying to get to the truth, but in this specific essay, it seems like what he's alluding to is the appearance of truth. Good writing makes core ideas look more true, but it can't objectively have a relation to truth itself, only with our description of said idea.

No test broke?

1. They have an imaginary reality based on what it once was. 2. They don’t accept the evidence. 3. They have incentives to build systems of people to increase their salaries.

I’ve said that many times over the years. The irrational mimicking of what others are doing created this Frankenstein model of working that proliferated over the industry.

Trunk driven does not mean mature team 100% of the time, but if you have a mature team trunk-driven is more efficient than PRs.

It only works if either everyone is senior, or it’s a project of 1-2 devs, or if people are pairing most of the time.

I love my 4k display, my standing desk, my keyboard, my Aeron Chair. However, I doubt that if those were offered it'd be reason alone for me to go back to the office.

But I'm not completely on the pessimistic side because there's one thing that could change everything: the moment someone discovers how to effectively revert human cell decay (which has already been done in lab rats btw), then reality changes completely and living to 200 and beyond is achievable.

It could very well be like turning lead into gold, an ideal so close but never achieved. But on aging, I think humans already know what needs to be done, so I wouldn't put all my bets against it.

I disagree with this bit, but perhaps it’s because “real priority” is vague. To-do lists offload tasks from memory to ensure we don’t forget them. It’s totally possible for something to be a “real priority” (whatever definition) and someone forgetting about it.

Don’t confuse priorities with memorization.