Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | anonymous532's commentslogin

I can't program with too much/little musical stimulation or without a driving beat, I also find repetition annoying and love symphonic and electronic elements.

So, if anyone is interested here's a random sample:

  Roof - Big Spoon Instrumental Version
  Theophany - Woods of Mystery
  Power-Haus - P.I.M.P. Shyloom Remix
  Nicholas Hooper - Umbridge Spoils a Beautiful Morning
  Arkana - Umi and the Serpent
  VOLO - Mystic
  Apashe - More (Prelude)


And yet, today I'm one of the 10000: https://xkcd.com/1053/


walking 30 mins/day or going up the stairs is surprisingly effective to avoid plenty of bad side effects of sitting.


Entering my mind palace, which has no connections to reality, everything(including me) is perfectly still yet able to morph into anything.


It's cute and definitely a great way to "draw S-curved arrow between boxes", but, under the assumption of being built to be used within a real project with dozens or hundreds of overlapping connections, this, like many other node systems, fails to be usable unless you push the complexity somewhere else.


Is someone selling it as some kind of universal solution for production diagramming problems of all scales, or is this just unnecessary negativity?


> under the assumption of being built to be used within a real project with dozens or hundreds of overlapping connections

This is an odd assumption to make.


Not so weird. Here's a random example, from Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Force-directed_graph_drawing#/...


These are straight lines. Not sure you even _want_ Bézier curves in this context, striaght lines are probably clearer in these graphs with hundreds of connections.


Ah, good point.


In that case the tool would need to lay out everything holistically but while it might do great arrow wise it could be useless for the user if they wanted the diagram a certain way for a reason.


Yes, that is what I've noticed too. On medium/big projects macro-level(holistic) arrow functionality is far more important than having beautifully curved arrows from node A to node B. Solving that problem strangely resembles routing on a circuit board with buses, labels, colors, layers etc.


There is a section in Graphics Gems 3 that describes a layout system for an Atari ST DAW app.


Which chapter in Gems III has this? I couldn’t find it.


but it's solving one part of the problem, and doing a good job at it. I've been making diagrams using graphviz, but setting the positions and edge curves manually, pulling the nodes and edges out of a list in excel

https://github.com/mathew-j-davis/boxesandarrows

I've been setting the 'waypoints' for more complex curves (curves with many bends) manually (typing the bezier numbers in by hand), while I try and figure out how I want them routed, you're right it's not easy figuring out rules for where edge should go, let alone implementing it


I think it depends on the use case and the organization/ordering of the boxes, which is not the focus of this library.

So for example, if the user is responsible for organizing the boxes and there is also a way to create custom arrows, this library can be used to suggest arrows, which might be good 95% of the time. That would be better than many of the tools I have used over the years.

However, if you want to generate a final diagram and can't guarantee, that the order of boxes doesn't allow for overlapping connections, this library is probably the wrong choice.


I don’t think the author is making any claims about the algorithm being able to handle more than the 2 box case. Why the negativity?


Not interested in this book, but maybe you find my opinion of any value:

Your website comes off as hustle to get money without content:

* The first section where you describe your product, you avoid all that the product is, making me think you don't actually have content which you want to show off(the book image is digital with no mention of it being an ebook, the description is about me and tehnologies, no preview, no list of concrete things I learn)

* In the next section you continue marketing a dream instead of the actual content, then you sell reviews, a story and others' opinion. Again, I conclude that you don't want me to form my own opinion of potentially bad content.

* "What I'll get" is meta content, things I should see after being sold the content. At that point I clicked off the website thinking it's a scam.

Before commenting this I went one more time to make sure I didn't miss anything and discovered that you actually do have chapters content and preview, just past the point where I clicked off.


I happened to have a quite different view.

It was clear to me the content I was supposed to get.

The only reason I didn't purchase is because the value proposition "save time managing your own side-project/startup deployment" is not smart, to me at least.

I decided to pay and outsource most of these things away in order to focus on differentiating software, marketing/sales and peace of mind.

Edit: I also think the "start a career in SRE" is quite a long stretch.


Thanks for your feedback.

> the value proposition "save time managing your own side-project/startup deployment" is not smart

I would say it's not right for all. But it's 100% true (from my readers) that people learn self-hosting to cut costs. That part of the page targets these people.

> I decided to pay and outsource most of these things away in order to focus on differentiating software, marketing/sales and peace of mind

I want to say that the saving angle is only one of the reasons pointed out. If you want to know how things work and don't care about saving, it's still worth to learn it.

I think you are not the target audience, though, since you want to focus on other aspects of the business which you probably enjoy more. :)

> I also think the "start a career in SRE" is quite a long stretch

The book shows you lot of Linux content you can find in RHCSA and RHCE exams. If you would really learn what's in it, you can be hired on spot for a junior role.


Those are fair points, I agree this is subjective. That's why I said "to me at least".

I've done this kind of work in the past and would certainly enjoy learning more. Your book was inviting. I just won't have the time at this moment. Need to focus elsewhere, as I said.

When thinking about business, the initial scale is quite small and managed services are cheap (and a variable cost) compared to the time I'd spend on self-managed (high upfront, fixed cost).


Thanks a lot for your feedback. Happy you found the time to write it.

I agree I should clarify it's an ebook sooner in text. And I want to redo the chapters. But I get a lot of conflicting feedback so hard to know what's right.

The page has a good conversion, though. So something is working.


Hard disagree. No one should do anything if they don't understand the consequences. It's no one's job to baby proof the world. If someone hasn't learnt that lesson yet they might be paying looks up PinePhone price $399 to learn it.


A lot of people write SW without underestanding the consequences. See recent NPM disaster for one example. Or Firefox (UI, "features") for another example. Ok, and Solar Winds for the best example.


I wrote software without understanding the consequences. That's how I learned.

Nobody paid me to do it, sure, but I did anyway.


The PinePhone is $150 with the convergence model being $200. The unreleased Pro model is $400, but this hack presumably wouldn't apply to that one.


The pro an rk3399 which deals with the MMC supplies itself so it can actually switch the voltage in software


I don't sign in often, thank you for this amazing reveal.


I think Manyverse is just an UI for whatever Scuttlebug is.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secure_Scuttlebutt

Secure Scuttlebutt, not Scuttlebug, as GP has it.


butt hehehe minion laugh


pick up a functional programming language and learn its [concept] library, it's a great way to experiment with mathematical concepts while also having something concrete to play with. I suggest Haskell.

P.S. challenge yourself to solve problems with as few lines as possible, that way you're forced to find better (combinations of) abstractions


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: