18 Matching Annotations
  1. Jan 2021
    1. Perhaps counterintuitively, the existential therapist’s goal is not necessarily to decrease anxiety or depression,

      counterintuitive: contrary to what one would intuitively expect

  2. Sep 2020
    1. let:hovering={active}

      It seems like it should be the other way around:

      let:active={hovering}
      

      to make it look like a regular let assignment.

      It's only when you consider what/how let:hovering on its own means/works that it makes a bit more sense that it is the way it is. When it's on its own, it's a little clearer that it's saying to "make use of" an available slot prop having the given name. (Very much like bind, where the LHS is also the name of the prop we're getting the data from.) Obviously we have to identify which prop we're wanting to use/pull data from, so that seems like the most essential/main/only thing the name could be referring to. (Of course, as a shortcut (in this shorthand version), and for consistency, it also names the local variable with the same name, but it wouldn't have to.)

      Another even simpler way to remember / look at it:

      1. Everything on the left hand of an prop/attribute [arg] corresponds to something in the component/element that you're passing the [arg] to. Usually it's a prop that you're passing in, but in this case (and in the case of bind:) it's more like a prop that you're pulling out of that component, and attaching to. Either way, the name on the LHS always corresponds to an export let inside that named component.
      2. Everything on the right side corresponds to a name/variable in the local scope. Usually it passes the value of that variable, but in the case of a let: or bind: it actually "passes the variable by reference" (not the value) and associates that local variable with the LHS (the "remote" side).

      Another example is bind: You're actually binding the RHS to the value of the exported prop named on the LHS, but when you read it (until you get used to it?) it can look like it's saying bind a variable named LHS to the prop on the RHS.

    1. It seems very counterintuitive at first, and frankly, kind of a pain.
    2. This is probably one of the biggest things to get used to in React – this flow where data goes out and then back in.
  3. May 2020
    1. It is often assumed that if we want to deploy software more frequently, we must accept lower levels of stability and reliability in our systems. In fact, peer-reviewed research shows that this is not the case—high performance teams consistently deliver services faster and more reliably than their low performing competition.
    1. the behavior of optional chaining (?.) with the non-null assertion operator (!) is extremely counter-intuitive
  4. Apr 2020
    1. It might be contrary to traditional thinking, but writing unique passwords down in a book and keeping them inside your physically locked house is a damn sight better than reusing the same one all over the web. Just think about it - you go from your "threat actors" (people wanting to get their hands on your accounts) being anyone with an internet connection and the ability to download a broadly circulating list Collection #1, to people who can break into your house - and they want your TV, not your notebook!
    1. Want to keep your users? Just make it easy for them to leave.
    2. We've found that an incredibly effective—although certainly counterintuitive—way to earn and maintain user trust is to make it easy for users to leave your product with their data in tow. This not only prevents lock-in and engenders trust, but also forces your team to innovate and compete on technical merit. We call this data liberation.
  5. Jun 2018
    1. In this kind of situation one might well ask: why continue to make the 80 per cent of products that only generate 20 per cent of profits? Companies rarely ask these questions, perhaps because to answer them would mean very radical action: to stop doing four-fifths of what you are doing is not a trivial change.

      Relevant on larger scale of global economies.

    2. George Bernard Shaw put it well: ‘The reasonable man adapts himself to the world. The unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
    3. The reason that the 80/20 Principle is so valuable is that it is counterintuitive. We tend to expect that all causes will have roughly the same significance. That all customers are equally valuable. That every bit of business, every product and every dollar of sales revenue is as good as another. That all employees in a particular category have roughly equivalent value. That each day or week or year we spend has the same significance. That all our friends have roughly equal value to us. That all enquiries or phone calls should be treated in the same way. That one university is as good as another. That all problems have a large number of causes, so that it is not worth isolating a few key causes. That all opportunities are of roughly equal value, so that we treat them all equally. We tend to assume that 50 per cent of causes or inputs will account for 50 per cent of results or outputs. There seems to be a natural, almost democratic, expectation that causes and results are generally equally balanced. And, of course, sometimes they are. But this ‘50/50 fallacy’ is one of the most inaccurate and harmful, as well as the most deeply rooted, of our mental maps.
    1. Thus mass collaboration is more refined and complex in its process and production on the level of collective engagement.
    1. Most people think of loyalty programs as an airline that gives miles to frequent fliers, a hotel that gives points toward a stay or a restaurant that offers a punch card incentive. While these may be called loyalty programs, I’ll argue that they are actually marketing programs disguised as loyalty programs. And while I don’t have a problem with this concept, we need to have a clear understanding of the differences between loyalty and marketing.
  6. Mar 2018
    1. the more I live, the more I dread death, even while I abhor life

      I don't know if this counts as a chiasmus, but regardless the contrasting ideas are interesting!

  7. Jan 2017