didn't go to school today yay!
Any conversation
I notice that language models are much better at programming than at writing. This is largely because, in programming, they have a closed feedback loop that allows them to find errors. Writing is much more complicated because the feedback is much more diffuse and delayed over time. In fact, it is often not well-defined.
mandelbrot
for y in range(10):
s=''
for x in range(25):
a=[]
for q in range(2):
z=c=x/25*3-2+1j*((y*2+q)/10-1);n=40
while n and abs(z)<2:z=z*z+c;n-=1
a+=[n<5]
s+=" โโโ"[a[0]+2*a[1]]
print(s)
โโ
โโโโโโโโ
โ โโโโโโโโโ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโโ
โโโ โโโโโโโโโ
โโโโโโโโ
โ โโโโ
โโcode quality is about coupling.
coupling is not a technical property of the code bytes.
code acquires its meaning in contact with the cultural environment, and coupling is about meaning.
two constants with no semantic relationship are nonetheless coupled in pragmatics if they refer to the same domain concept.
if your goal is to minimise the time integral of future work, you must understand your domain: it decides which lines will need changing.
to carve up a codebase is to carve up the world.
Switched from gpg to age, because pinentry sucks. With age I set both of my Macโs security enclaves + software private key (stored in Passwords.app) + yubikey for hardware backup. Looks good.
Judgement, taste and quality were always precious skills. In the world of , I have become more aware of the fact that it is often hard to put in words why something is good, great or amazing - or just looks good, but is average.
A lot of the professional content I see feels like most Netflix series. They have all the elements - but the overall experience is still meh.
Quality is still hard to achieve.


