(no subject)

Monday, June 27th, 2011 16:26

Redux” is related to “reduce” only etymologically; that similarity was enough that I didn't look up what it actually meant for a long time.

(no subject)

Wednesday, February 9th, 2011 09:49

Do not sort the category “Other” under “O”.


Monday, December 6th, 2010 07:59

10,000 minutes ≈ 1 week

(no subject)

Monday, October 4th, 2010 18:39
x {UleavesTair,avg}d x 0     when t now (mod 1 solar year)

Unix tip

Monday, October 4th, 2010 17:47

The following command is not idempotent:

cat * > cat.txt

“The most important constraint [on naming this] is that it's a good pun.”

(no subject)

Wednesday, July 14th, 2010 08:33

It appears that everyone From The Internet lives in California.

$ cat ~/bin/maken
# Make files and view the results.
make "$@" && open "$@"

UPDATE: Turns out I posted this previously, with further thoughts: Avoiding repeating myself (on the command line).

Ask them what the length of a vector is.

(no subject)

Monday, April 26th, 2010 09:32

(Images are public domain from Wikimedia Commons: 1 2)


Thursday, April 1st, 2010 15:06

Weird thing: Once upon a time I did a lot of work with MOO-code. Ever since then, if I’m writing something and my typing gets ahead of my thinking, I often type “#-1”. It’s not meaningful in the context, it’s not a joke to myself — I have no idea what’s going on there.

(In MOO #-1 is the canonical value which is an-object-reference-but-not-a-valid-object, like null in Java.)

2000 food calories/day ≈ 100 watts

(no subject)

Sunday, March 14th, 2010 14:28

Extended subset” makes perfect sense as long as you don’t think about it with set theory.

This, for example, is a link: Kevin Reid

This is not a link, but a URL: http://switchb.org/kpreid/

(no subject)

Friday, February 5th, 2010 14:53
The people who have come to rely on features that are actually implementation errors are called ‘mistakeholders’.
— Chip Morningstar, today's friam

I have a simple guideline for real life interactions with others that carries over quite well on-line, "Deal with issues; ignore details."

It's amazing how well this works in person, especially when trying to get something done. My number one question to another is probably, "Is that an issue or a detail?" We can almost always decide together which it is. Then, if it's an issue, we deal with it, and if it's a detail, we move on to the next issue.

This has also saved me countless hours and aggravation on-line. If I post something and someone disagrees, I quickly decide whether or not it's really an issue and only engage the other if it is. I realize that this is just a judgment call, but I'd estimate about 90% of on-line disagreements are just details. In these cases, I think it's best to simply move on.

edw519 at Hacker News

I thought this was, even if not necessarily a rule to immediately apply oneself, at least a concept worth thinking about. (Read the further discussion as well.)

Photo taken by me in a Staples store. Text added with Zach Beane's roflbot.

I blame a certain English teacher last year for introducing “FAIL” into my vocabulary.

Every time you write “ | ” in shell, that's concurrent programming.