- May 2023
-
www.reddit.com www.reddit.com
-
It’s great that there’s interest in this stuff. Your articles are inspiring, as is Jillian Hess’s NotesSubstack, team Greene/Holiday/Oppenheimer, and the German scholars who focus on the technology of writing, such as Hektor Haarkötter. But I don’t see this as nostalgia. For me it’s history in service of the present and the future.
reply to u/atomicnotes at https://www.reddit.com/r/Zettelkasten/comments/13cqnsk/comment/jjkwc05/?utm_source=reddit&utm_medium=web2x&context=3
Definitely history in service of the present and the future. Too many people are doing some terribly hard work attempting to reinvent wheels which have been around for centuries.
-
- May 2022
-
Local file Local file
-
I’ve spent years studying how prolific writers, artists, and thinkersof the past managed their creative process. I’ve spent countlesshours researching how human beings can use technology to extendand enhance our natural cognitive abilities. I’ve personally
experimented with every tool, trick, and technique available today for making sense of information. This book distills the very best insights I’ve discovered from teaching thousands of people around the world how to realize the potential of their ideas.
All this work just for this? When some basic reading of historical note taking, information management, and intellectual history would have saved him the time and effort? Looking through the references I'm not seeing much before even 2010, so it seems as if he's spent most of his time reinventing the wheel.
-
- Apr 2022
-
-
three steps required to solve the all-importantcorrespondence problem. Step one, according to Shenkar: specify one’s ownproblem and identify an analogous problem that has been solved successfully.Step two: rigorously analyze why the solution is successful. Jobs and hisengineers at Apple’s headquarters in Cupertino, California, immediately got towork deconstructing the marvels they’d seen at the Xerox facility. Soon theywere on to the third and most challenging step: identify how one’s owncircumstances differ, then figure out how to adapt the original solution to thenew setting.
Oded Shenkar's three step process for effective problem solving using imitation: - Step 1. Specify your problem and identify an analogous problem that has been successfully solved. - Step 2. Analyze why the solution was successful. - Step 3. Identify how your problem and circumstances differ from the example problem and figure out how to best and most appropriately adapt the original solution to the new context.
The last step may be the most difficult.
The IndieWeb broadly uses the idea of imitation to work on and solve a variety of different web design problems. By focusing on imitation they dramatically decrease the work and effort involved in building a website. The work involved in creating new innovative solutions even in their space has been much harder, but there, they imitate others in breaking the problems down into the smallest constituent parts and getting things working there.
Link this to the idea of "leading by example".
Link to "reinventing the wheel" -- the difficulty of innovation can be more clearly seen in the process of people reinventing the wheel for themselves when they might have simply imitated a more refined idea. Searching the state space of potential solutions can be an arduous task.
Link to "paving cow paths", which is a part of formalizing or crystalizing pre-tested solutions.
-
- Oct 2020
-
www.basefactor.com www.basefactor.com
-
Of course you can start implementing your own thing, but you will waste a lot of precious time reinventing the wheel. Why not take advantage of a validation library that takes care of all this complexity for you?
-
You can try to build a solution to tackle these issues on your own, but it will cost you time and money... why not use a battle-tested solution to handle all this complexity?
-
-
github.com github.com
-
Other frameworks, which use a template syntax built atop HTML — Svelte, Vue, Ractive, Glimmer etc — have historically been fragmented, meaning those tools need to be reinvented many times.
-
-
facebook.github.io facebook.github.io
-
Why not just use that instead of inventing a syntax that's not part of ECMAScript?
-
-
github.com github.com
-
Why struggle with custom Syntax DSLs when you can use one so widely supported?
-
-
-
People constantly suggest that I should have just worked with a different library instead of writing another one.
-
- Sep 2020
-
github.com github.com
-
The main rationale for this PR is that, in my hones opinion, Svelte needs a way to support style overrides in an intuitive and close to plain HTML/CSS way. What I regard as intuitive is: Looking at how customizing of styles is being done when applying a typical CSS component framework, and making that possible with Svelte.
-
-
github.com github.com
-
Why make another UI component kit when we already got Smelte and SMUI? What's so special about Svelta?
-
-
readit.plus readit.plus
-
They write their own function because it’s easier and more fun than figuring out how the old function works.
-
- Jul 2020
-
api.rubyonrails.org api.rubyonrails.org
-
Why did Rails team decide they need to implement their own "version" of Timecop?
On the one hand, that's great to reduce dependencies, but on the other hand, small dependencies are great (and rails already has lots of them), it just bloats ActiveSupport more, and creates a needless "duplication" of an already popular de facto standard for this problem -- one which (unlike Timecop) can't be easily used outside of the Rails/ActiveSupport ecosystem. It doesn't seem different enough to warrant creating it...
Timecop: Works with Rails and non-Rails
ActiveSupport::Testing::TimeHelpers: for use outside rails, requires dependency on bigger gem, AS.
-
-
frontdeveloper.pl frontdeveloper.pl
-
en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org