The author talks about the shaping of the work, so I guess this is implicit.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45485644

Points: 2

# Comments: 0

I agree that mentoring is hard, and I want to read your take.

I wonder if we agree on expert aesthetics or not. You write:

> Experts tend to have an aesthetic preference towards technically challenging work rather than simple-but-interesting work, and I’ve written more about this phenomenon here: expert aesthetics.

When I read the passage the first time, I thought you meant "experts prefer to work on hard problems in order to arrive at simple solutions". But that's not what you're saying!

The links are giving me 404s.

https://boydkane.com/hard https://boydkane.com/expert_aesthetics

https://youtube.com/watch?v=nD-QHbRWcoM

This is about how I write Clojure.

I start out with some code that does the thing I want. Either effectfull code that "does the thing" or functions from data to data.

After a while, I feel like I'm missing a domain operation or two. At that point I've got an idea about what kind of abstraction I'm missing.

Rafael Dittwald describes the process of looking for domain operations and domain entities nicely here:

https://youtu.be/vK1DazRK_a0

I searched around, but didn't find anything. Perhaps the title is something different than "go minimal feature set".

Though I'd rather call it a personal memex than a personal blog!

I'd say it's yours. In that frame, there are lots of ideas.

Lets assume there are 10 000 known ideas. Then there's 10^8 combinations of two ideas, and 10^12 combinations of three ideas. That's a lot of ideas, even for the internet! I bet not all of them are named. And different people are going to frame ideas differently.

I also believe trying to form your ideas in reference to existing knowledge is a great way to learn existing knowledge.

Your mind is a living collection of your own ideas, and a history of their significance to your prior life. Not a dead library of pointers to other dead libraries.

Books are great. But you shoudn't outsource your brain. The learning happens when you think for yourself. Reading is good. Thinking about what you've read is even better. But don't stop with the summary! Go further. Apply it to your context. Try it, it's fun.

Personally, I want an even higher signal to noise ratio and even fewer articles. Perhaps significance > 7, and articles from the last week.

REBL let's you browse complex data structures and move around in them. In a REPL, printing a megabyte of JSON can be ... hard to read.

I'd like to riff on this.

People's attention is limited. People's capacity for novel stuff is limited. And things are bound to be commoditized.

But that's not necessarily a bad thing. Firefox is a tool that just works for me. It doesn't crash and delete my tabs when it visits a random web site. Sure, that's predictable.

But that frees up my attention to go elsewhere. To do /brand new/ stuff, not just mess around with web browsers.

If every airbnb looks the same, perhaps that's just because people get out of the airbnb to do the stuff they actually want to do?

Stability enables movement.

I thought there were factory problems, a page with information about product returns, and possibly a story around that.

I'm going to assume you don't have people on your team / in your organization you can learn from.

In short, I'd:

1. Make something that reflects the things that I'm curious to learn

2. Then ask specific people for specific advice about the thing I've made.

https://gist.github.com/ssrihari/0bf159afb781eef7cc552a1a0b1...

Edit: if by "learning Lisp" you mean lisps other than Clojure, I don't know :)

Never used blackout curtains in Oslo or Trondheim, absolutely needed them in Finnmark. I wouldn't say that blackout curtains are the norm in the Nordic countries, especially not Denmark.

But if you're in a place where there's midnight sun, I suggest getting some.