Justin Moon
Austin Bitdevs, Fedimint, AI for Individual Rights @HRF
But do we know what we’re giving up when we apply this style of programming? The proliferation of average is the sacrifice of the weird. Typescript displaces Clojure. Idiosyncratic coding styles are swallowed under a wave of monotone. Deep understanding of a problem is replaced by a rat’s nest of exponential backoff, try/catch, and convergent interfaces. Minds skim across the surface of understanding like rocks on a lake. Programming pearls are cast before swine.
But do we know what we’re giving up when we apply this style of programming? The proliferation of average is the sacrifice of the weird. Typescript displaces Clojure. Idiosyncratic coding styles are swallowed under a wave of monotone. Deep understanding of a problem is replaced by a rat’s nest of exponential backoff, try/catch, and convergent interfaces. Minds skim across the surface of understanding like rocks on a lake. Programming pearls are cast before swine.
But do we know what we’re giving up when we apply this style of programming? The proliferation of average is the sacrifice of the weird. Typescript displaces Clojure. Idiosyncratic coding styles are swallowed under a wave of monotone. Deep understanding of a problem is replaced by a rat’s nest of exponential backoff, try/catch, and convergent interfaces. Minds skim across the surface of understanding like rocks on a lake. Programming pearls are cast before swine.
But do we know what we’re giving up when we apply this style of programming? The proliferation of average is the sacrifice of the weird. Typescript displaces Clojure. Idiosyncratic coding styles are swallowed under a wave of monotone. Deep understanding of a problem is replaced by a rat’s nest of exponential backoff, try/catch, and convergent interfaces. Minds skim across the surface of understanding like rocks on a lake. Programming pearls are cast before swine.