A thread on HN about bad code in legacy projects both makes me think how little we've learned as a discipline over the years and, honestly, how little credit we give ourselves for some pretty major
c.f. https://t.co/S5XIDxFUrH
(Parallel evolution of code: I wrote a less-well-specified one at last gig.)
At risk of stating the obvious: this is a relatively novel development.
* a single, common encoding for almost all human languages
* a single, parseable, human-readable data interchange format
* a default protocol for information transport
This is very good for learners.
More from Patrick McKenzie
So the cryptocurrency industry has basically two products, one which is relatively benign and doesn't have product market fit, and one which is malignant and does. The industry has a weird superposition of understanding this fact and (strategically?) not understanding it.
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
If everyone was holding bitcoin on the old x86 in their parents basement, we would be finding a price bottom. The problem is the risk is all pooled at a few brokerages and a network of rotten exchanges with counter party risk that makes AIG circa 2008 look like a good credit.
— Greg Wester (@gwestr) November 25, 2018
The benign product is sovereign programmable money, which is historically a niche interest of folks with a relatively clustered set of beliefs about the state, the literary merit of Snow Crash, and the utility of gold to the modern economy.
This product has narrow appeal and, accordingly, is worth about as much as everything else on a 486 sitting in someone's basement is worth.
The other product is investment scams, which have approximately the best product market fit of anything produced by humans. In no age, in no country, in no city, at no level of sophistication do people consistently say "Actually I would prefer not to get money for nothing."
This product needs the exchanges like they need oxygen, because the value of it is directly tied to having payment rails to move real currency into the ecosystem and some jurisdictional and regulatory legerdemain to stay one step ahead of the banhammer.
I like this heuristic, and have a few which are similar in intent to it:
Hiring efficiency:
How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?
What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?
How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:
* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work
How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.
(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)
How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
Here's how I'd measure the health of any tech company:
— Jeff Atwood (@codinghorror) October 25, 2018
How long, as measured from the inception of idea to the modified software arriving in the user's hands, does it take to roll out a *1 word copy change* in your primary product?
Hiring efficiency:
How long does it take, measured from initial expression of interest through offer of employment signed, for a typical candidate cold inbounding to the company?
What is the *theoretical minimum* for *any* candidate?
How long does it take, as a developer newly hired at the company:
* To get a fully credentialed machine issued to you
* To get a fully functional development environment on that machine which could push code to production immediately
* To solo ship one material quanta of work
How long does it take, from first idea floated to "It's on the Internet", to create a piece of marketing collateral.
(For bonus points: break down by ambitiousness / form factor.)
How many people have to say yes to do something which is clearly worth doing which costs $5,000 / $15,000 / $250,000 and has never been done before.
More from Tech
On press call, Zuckerberg says FB users "naturally engage more with sensational content" that comes close to violating its rules. Compares it to cable TV and tabloids, and says, "This seems to be true regardless of where we set our policy lines."
Zuckerberg says FB is in the process of setting up a "new independent body" that users will be able to appeal content takedowns to. Sort of like the "Facebook Supreme Court" idea he previewed earlier this year.
Zuckerberg: "One of my biggest lessons from this year is that when you connect more than 2 billion people, you’re going to see the good and bad of humanity."
This is how Facebook says it's trying to change the engagement pattern on its services. https://t.co/3p0PGc912o
.@RebeccaJarvis asks Zuckerberg if anyone is going to lose their job over the revelations in the NYT story. He dodges, says that personnel issues aren't a public matter, and that employee performance is evaluated all the time.
Zuckerberg says FB is in the process of setting up a "new independent body" that users will be able to appeal content takedowns to. Sort of like the "Facebook Supreme Court" idea he previewed earlier this year.
Zuckerberg: "One of my biggest lessons from this year is that when you connect more than 2 billion people, you’re going to see the good and bad of humanity."
This is how Facebook says it's trying to change the engagement pattern on its services. https://t.co/3p0PGc912o
.@RebeccaJarvis asks Zuckerberg if anyone is going to lose their job over the revelations in the NYT story. He dodges, says that personnel issues aren't a public matter, and that employee performance is evaluated all the time.
![Peter McCormack [Jan/3\u279e\u20bf \U0001f511\u220e]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/1524287442307723265/_59ITDbJ_normal.jpg)
