I feel like that was one of the core assumptions and point of the article, but it didn’t have any explanation beyond “multiple programming languages.” Feels a bit flat to me.

They're angry, a lack of Ken

Clicks downward arrow

I guess their abacus broke

This is a haiku

Note that I'm not even criticizing or otherwise knocking these business practices, I'm simply making some observations. My use of the term bullshit was particularly to describe the illusion of choice. Not that it's anything new. http://www.visualcapitalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/c...

I think the world would be just fine without fortnite, but I will say unreal engine is pretty nice to have. Probably just a matter of time until Microsoft owns unreal engine as well.

Tangentially relevant due to Tencent involvement:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gXlauRB1EQ&ab_channel=Peopl... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTMF6xEiAaY&ab_channel=Peopl...

Between gaming (the biggest form of media), supercomputers, science computation, crypto nonsense, etc. It's really looking to me like nvidia is actually one of the biggest power players across the globe. Makes me really wonder about the tech they aren't flashing to the public. I was personally astounded when I saw their announcement to purchase ARM. I've seen a few instances of people saying the dead acquisition is stifling innovation. Honestly I'm kind of happy it didn't go through. Probably just a lack of vision on my part, though.

https://olkb.com/

Also, look into QMK. For anyone who wants a more ergonomic keybind setup, check out some mnemonic namespacing stuff.

Spacevim, Spacemacs, VSpaceCode (for vs code), etc. You can always take the approach and apply it to your existing config. The three important bits are:

1. Give your thumbs more resposibility

2. Namespace actions under an ergonomic leader key, using mnemonics

3. Use a discoverability plugin like which-key to help discover new keybinds

ll and la are shorthand for ls -l and ls -la

For those of you who find it vital to the way you work/think, do you think the same level of power is possible with anything other than Lisp?

Would you rather work with a system that embeds various computational approaches into an environment with metalinguistic capabilities, such as lisp? Or would you rather use a system that glues together various tools that are focused on whatever approach is needed for a specific piece?

By computational approaches I guess I mean a lot of different things here. Functional, imperative, and relational programming. Binaries, web UIs, desktop GUIs, etc. I think the main difference would be having different pieces be first class citizens in the core environment.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29166818

Points: 9

# Comments: 2

Does anyone have any recommendations for strategy games that have helped you develop new ideas that are useful in the life of an engineer/entrepreneur?

Looking to do a bit of gaming and maybe get a little bit of brain exercise. Thanks =)

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=29103059

Points: 33

# Comments: 26

2. Intercept and scan all civilian communication

3. ???

4. Yellowstone explodes

One way to think about this is propagators. I’m still learning myself, but a compelling example is lisp. With lisp you can write macros that essentially allow you to treat your code as a tree and arbitrarily modify that tree (aka arbitrarily write code). You can then compile that code while the system is running and execute it. It’s not just about macro expansion at startup or a single compile time step at the beginning of execution. The system can be designed with this in mind.

It’s also about introspection, the ability to ask questions about the system at runtime as it evolves.

Sussman and Kay both talk a lot about DNA and biology, and the ability for systems to dynamically expand, change, and repair themselves.

When I think about this kind of stuff nowadays I picture something like lisp with an execution environment like the BEAM (so basically LFE) and an introspection system powered by a declarative constraint solving query language (something like Datalog-style RDF found in things like datalevin and it’s predecessors). I think that lends itself really well to these kinds of systems, including another point that Kay talks about pretty frequently. The ability for two systems (and in our cases two actors in one environment count) to negotiate with each other via some shared fundamental language to understand each other’s purpose. SOP style approaches seem like a compelling way to do that, but the main problem to me is identifying entities as globally unique as part of that negotiation process.

Also don’t listen to me, I’m a monkey.

Does anyone know of any decent approaches to building organic systems of services that can be arbitrarily distributed? The two things that come to mind immediately are the BEAM and something like Kubernetes. I have no experience with Kubernetes, but it does seem a bit heavy handed. With the BEAM my concern would be platform buy-in for everything. I'm exploring ideas for a new system I'm planning, and I'd like to be able to mix and match different languages/platforms as time goes on, with a focus on building really small services that are composable and reusable. Is Kubernetes the best way to do this these days?

Things I'm looking for:

- No platform/language buy-in (each service/unit can do things however it needs to)

- Hot reload of services

- Ability to deploy multiple instances of a service

- Ability to deploy different versions of a service (e.g. version 1, version 1.1, version 2, etc.)

- Ability to manage/monitor all of said services

- Some sort of first class/idiomatic way to communicate between them (even if that's just http)

- Low operational overhead/complexity

Seems to me like the BEAM hits all of these except the first. And Kubernetes hits all of these except the last xD

Thoughts?

P.S. Additionally I guess it would be nice to have some sort of super simple and versionable configuration that governs the current state of deployment. No idea what it would look like. Maybe something like terraform?

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28984271

Points: 5

# Comments: 3