<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: wonderzombie</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=wonderzombie</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 15 Apr 2026 03:05:26 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=wonderzombie" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Microsoft Near Deal to Buy Minecraft Maker Mojang"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Not to split hairs, but that's really not how I'd characterize that tweet. He only says he's done being mad about it.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 09 Sep 2014 23:56:28 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8294111</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8294111</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8294111</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Hackathon Accidentally Picks Perfect Metaphor for Its Own Awfulness"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Most likely it would've been a larger fraction at almost any point in the last 60 years.<p>Whether you like it or not, you derive innumerable tangible benefits from living in American society, in no small part because generations before you paid for it. You're probably white, male, hetero, relatively young, and relatively healthy, and none of the advantages which accrued to you because of that are due to your life choices. Arguably, you have the sense of entitlement exactly backwards.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2014 21:12:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044610</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044610</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044610</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Hackathon Accidentally Picks Perfect Metaphor for Its Own Awfulness"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This summary of social equality & justice is not something anyone should take seriously. It is a very one-sided, reductive description of the issue. If nothing else, this comment is a good example of the siege mentality on display in folk of a conservative bent: long on cynical rhetoric about "those people" and politicians while short on nuance or compassion for fellow human beings.<p>Long story short, some people question the idea that people who are successful deserve what they have merely because they have it, and that those who do are unsuccessful deserve to be poor because, in a word, they're meritless. Furthermore, some people want society at large to acknowledge the role chance and circumstance play in whether or not someone is successful.<p>Your last complaint is so old it's a cliche.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2014 20:47:18 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044461</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044461</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044461</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Hackathon Accidentally Picks Perfect Metaphor for Its Own Awfulness"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>It's the idea that meritocracy in America is a sham, and a self-congratulatory idea in any case. It starts from the premise that if you have succeeded, you deserve to have succeeded without taking into account circumstances that led to your success (e.g. parents' wealth).<p>Contrariwise people are sick of being told they're "meritless" because of circumstances beyond their control-- the deck is stacked against you if you happen to fall into one of many less-than-fortunate categories.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 16 Jul 2014 20:34:26 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044385</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044385</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8044385</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Ultima IV"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I'm torn as to whether I agree. If there's one thing I appreciate about modern games -- games within the last 10 or so years -- is that they respect my time. There's a lot we could unpack here, so I'll just be brief. Ish.<p>While it might have been awesome at the time (I loved Ultima IV) I'm not a kid anymore. I don't have summer vacation. I also don't have ADHD. What I <i>do</i> have is an hour a day to play a game before bed, so that game damn well better make it worth my while.<p>Besides, the consistent popularity of MMOs and particularly MOBAs belies the whole idea of ADHD as driving factor. Both reward a large investment of time & mastery. And both are practically PC-only.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2014 20:22:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8022176</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8022176</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8022176</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Swift Blog"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Slightly off-topic: is this the first time Apple has hosted a blog? I realize it's developer.apple.com rather than apple.com, but still.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 11 Jul 2014 18:20:29 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8021598</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8021598</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8021598</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Just Use Sublime Text"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You're mostly right re: knowledge transfer, although it's really as simple as you imply.<p>First, Vim emulation widgets vary a great deal in quality, supporting different, disjoint subsets of Vim functionality. Just as an example, ideaVim doesn't support Ctrl-W for navigating between panes. The deeper your knowledge of Vim, the more diminishing returns you get.<p>Second, Sublime Text's Vintage mode supports enough of my Vim workflow that it's actually made me faster with Vim and other Vim emulation widgets. To the extent that any Vim emulation mode overlaps with Vim, I have improved across the board. Of course this is true mostly for the less deep features IME.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2014 22:23:05 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7929428</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7929428</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7929428</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Just Use Sublime Text"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I guess bloat is subjective. Your setup looks nice and I'm glad you found something that works for you. But on the flip side, it "looks" bloated to me, too— any reasonably useful Vim setup will have at least a dozen or so plugins and/or an intricate .vimrc.<p>Sublime Text did almost all I wanted out of the box. Maybe it has more functionality than I need, but it won hands down in terms of installing (and maintaining) software in order for it to be usable for me.<p>FWIW, since I abandoned Vim as my main editor, I just grab spf13-vim[0] when I want to use it. It's still really handy to be able to type vi foo to edit a file at the command line.<p>[0]: <a href="http://vim.spf13.com/" rel="nofollow">http://vim.spf13.com/</a></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sun, 22 Jun 2014 22:16:09 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7929411</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7929411</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7929411</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Adding 'rebeccapurple' color to CSS Color Level 4"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>If share a cookie with a friend, you're that person who demands I share with everyone within earshot, aren't you?<p>Just take it for what it is. It's one act of kindness. Buying a sandwich for a homeless person doesn't mean every homeless person is now entitled to a sandwich from you.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2014 16:13:29 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7925333</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7925333</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7925333</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "The Boomerang Kids Won't Leave"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The obvious rejoinder, of course, is: who was president when the crash happened in the first place? And I disagree with your characterization that it hasn't helped, either-- look at how many jobs have been added since the administration took office.<p>But this isn't a productive framing.<p>As much as we wish presidential administrations could make or break the economy -- it makes partisan sense, and it makes us think at least someone <i>could</i> run the show if they got their shit together -- it just isn't so. The current recession has its roots going much farther back than 2008. Depending on how you reckon, someone who's now 27 was either not yet conceived or in diapers when the bubble began inflating.<p>Likewise no amount of perseverance, hard work, temerity, gumption, or whatever the hell you want to call it, can wish the economy back to the '90s.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 20 Jun 2014 20:26:55 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7922704</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7922704</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7922704</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "It's Time For a Hard Bitcoin Fork"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I notice you bring up the exact arguments that the piece addresses explicitly, yet you do not acknowledge this one way or another.<p>But the meta-reason is: if someone thinks they can get away with it, why wouldn't they do it? With that presumption you could even argue it's the rational choice. If you do it subtly, there's plenty of room for doubt. Furthermore, there are enough people who're invested for ideological reasons that, in the absence of strong evidence, all most people will hear is a lot of he-said, she-said.<p>More to the point, factor in any monetary investment in the scheme -- the prospect of collapse should a critical mass reach the same conclusion, for instance -- and the people who've invested have an incentive to stay the course. That incentive to maintain a good reputation cuts both ways. Reputation is a matter of popular perception.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 13 Jun 2014 22:27:00 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891150</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891150</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7891150</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Java is the COBOL of my generation and Go is its successor"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I think you're suggesting a false dichotomy.<p>Of course a complex language can be used to write simple code and vice versa. Ultimately every program is going to increase in complexity-- that quote about failure vs legacy nightmare applies here.<p>IMHO it's better to reduce the complexity of the language to a minimum so that language/runtime complexity doesn't have a multiplicative effect on application code complexity.<p>For instance, C++ is a complex language. That complexity inevitably accrues to applications written in C++. This is a conscious trade-off of the language -- performance + high level programming, or what have you.<p>In the end, though, I am not sure I'd argue there's much correlation between simplicity of the language and simplicity of the code. It's too hard to get anyone to agree on what simple means anyway. Me, I prefer Hickey's "Simple Made Easy" for that, but not everyone agrees.<p>ETA: I guess what I would say is: would you prefer to start with something simpler and build complexity appropriate to the problem domain out of simple, but sound ideas? Or would you prefer to start with a set of inherently complex primitives and build something <i>else</i> complex on top of that? It's subjective, but I've probably leaked my bias in the phrasing.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 02 May 2014 18:38:34 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7687341</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7687341</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7687341</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "My Favorite Heuristic for Evaluating Relationships: The Antifragile Person"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>This also reminds me of the quote from Heinlein:<p><i>Moving parts in rubbing contact require lubrication to avoid excessive wear. Honorifics and formal politeness provide lubrication where people rub together. Often the very young, the untravelled, the naive, the unsophisticated deplore these formalities as "empty," "meaningless," or "dishonest," and scorn to use them. No matter how "pure" their motives, they thereby throw sand into machinery that does not work too well at best.</i></p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 01 May 2014 18:34:19 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7681788</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7681788</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7681788</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Piketty’s Capital in a Nutshell"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p><i>If you discount evidence ...</i><p>That's reductive. Not everyone has the bandwidth to sort through every iota of evidence. And the fact is that there's no shortage of people who have little in arguing in good faith. So people resort to heuristics such as reputation, credibility, what other "reputable" people say, etc.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2014 16:13:23 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7660881</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7660881</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7660881</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard (1992)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Seconded. I started learning Mandarin some years ago. The written language remained opaque for a very long time since you need to learn a rather long list of hanzi before you can read anything interesting. And there's little guarantee you'll be able to pronounce any of it anyway.<p>Korean was kind of revelatory for me. Maybe I don't know what all the words mean, but being able to sound them out Hangul is far more rewarding than it ought to be.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 19:26:10 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623111</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623111</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623111</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard (1992)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>My experience was similar, that at least the basics of the language are easy. The hard part is if you want to learn to read and write-- it's a ton of memorization. It doesn't get any easier, either. Some characters have a radical which is a pronunciation hint, a meaning hint, both, neither, etc.<p>The other, other part is speaking idiomatically. There are a ton of idioms.<p>Don't forget about measure words, either. :)<p>I think you can make yourself understood easily enough, as I could chat a bit with Chinese coworkers or waitresses. But I suspect to truly master it, it's a lot harder than a language (e.g.) with an alphabet.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 19:19:16 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623068</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623068</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623068</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Why Chinese Is So Damn Hard (1992)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Yes. In Mandarin, there's a much smaller set of sounds than in English. There are many, many words which sound exactly the same -- same pronunciation, same tone, different hanzi -- before you even get into the issue of same pronunciation, same tones. Hence the reliance on context.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 21 Apr 2014 19:14:44 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623036</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623036</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7623036</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Lisp is Abstract Syntax"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>That's funny. This is one of the reason why I don't care much for Common Lisp. Hashtables in particular are common as mud in programming, but I have to work with a clunky interface specific to each abstraction. Ironically this puts CL closer to Java and C++ than the likes of Python and Ruby.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2014 00:18:24 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607324</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607324</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607324</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Lisp is Abstract Syntax"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The difference is that you end up with (e.g.) <a href="https://cs50.harvard.edu/resources/cppreference.com/operator_precedence.html" rel="nofollow">https://cs50.harvard.edu/resources/cppreference.com/operator...</a> versus the AST being integral to the language itself.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2014 00:12:14 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607313</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607313</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607313</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by wonderzombie in "Lisp is Abstract Syntax"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>FWIW, you're learning two major paradigms at once: the immutable/functional paradigm <i>and</i> a Lisp, and Clojure itself has very strong opinions about the former. You'll get a very different feel from, say, Racket.<p>Is there something in particular you're having a hard time with, out of curiosity? I don't consider myself particularly brilliant but I didn't have a year's worth of trouble with Clojure.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 18 Apr 2014 00:10:15 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607305</link><dc:creator>wonderzombie</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607305</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7607305</guid></item></channel></rss>