• i

    Ivan Reese

    6 months ago
    [Moved from #thinking-together, original post by @curious_reader] Hello 👋 FoC community! Today I was introduced to the book: Nothing Sacred by Douglas Rushkoffhttps://www.goodreads.com/book/show/139712.Nothing_Sacred It seems it has some relation to open source. So I was wondering, has anyone here read the book? What could you say about it and it’s relation to open source? Thank you 🙏
    i
    1 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • alltom

    alltom

    6 months ago
    I missed Women’s Day by a hair, but I'm still curious: who’s got links to inspirational work by women? I can start with Margaret Burnett. Her papers introduced me to information scent / information foraging theory in the context of programming interfaces, and it turned out she had a long history in end-user programming and explainability too: https://web.engr.oregonstate.edu/~burnett/reprints.html
    alltom
    Ray Imber
    +3
    6 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • j

    Jack Rusher

    6 months ago
    I find this extremely delightful!

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b3F9OtH2Xx4

    j
    Scott Anderson
    2 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • karki

    karki

    6 months ago
    https://batou.xyz/content/augmented-desk
    Augmented Environments are physical spaces where people can work and learn, collectively or individually, by using day-to-day tools such as pen and paper, or other quotidian objects.This affordable and extensible system augments the user’s capabilities without being invasive, recognising their natural language and humane behaviours.
    karki
    j
    3 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • dnmfarrell

    dnmfarrell

    6 months ago
    https://mitchellh.com/writing/contributing-to-complex-projects I thought this was good advice for understanding most software projects. In particular, interacting with the material by making changes to the source as way to verify (and build experience with) the code.
    dnmfarrell
    1 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • t

    Tom MacWright

    6 months ago
    it's amazing that mitchell still writes good stuff and writes code after founding a kazilliion dollar company, not many have done the same
    t
    1 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Orion Reed

    Orion Reed

    6 months ago
    For anyone interested in the notion of “information”, there are three papers that make great contributions to the discussion: a literature review (survey) of existing notions, and two derivative/follow-up works that make useful critiques and additions. Here is the survey, a follow up (critique and extension) and a second follow up (a taxonomy). The last can be freely accessed with a Jstor account, but I can also send people the PDF if interested.
    Orion Reed
    j
    2 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Florian Schulz

    Florian Schulz

    6 months ago
    60 years after Engelbart’s vision, 54 years after the Mother of all Demos, 41 years after the Desktop Metaphor, 34 years after HyperCard, 32 years after the introduction of the World Wide Web, 26 years after Macromedia Flash, 12 years after the iPad — why are we still stuck with this:
    [Picture of an empty text editor].
    The interface of a text editor is not only unsubstantial — it is non-existing. Nothing tells you anything. Why do we have to write code in order to create a visual product? Is there really no better user interface for designing visual and interactive experiences?
    When it comes to design work, the text editor is Engelbarts brick-on-a-pencil. It de-augments our design work.
    https://borism.medium.com/tools-shape-our-products-fa121366dac4
    Florian Schulz
    Kartik Agaram
    +1
    5 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Kartik Agaram

    Kartik Agaram

    6 months ago
    https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2022/02/10/tools Teaser: There are two kinds of tools: user-friendly tools, and physics-friendly tools. Physics-friendly tools force you to grow in a specific disciplined way, while user-friendly tools save you the trouble of a specific kind of growth and discipline. Whether you use the saved effort to grow somewhere else, or merely grow lazier, is up to you. Most people choose a little of both, and grow more leisured, and we call this empowerment. Physics-friendly tools feel like real tools, and never let you forget that they exist. But if you grow good enough at wielding them, they allow you to forget that you exist. User-friendly tools feel like alert servants, and never let you forget that you exist. If you grow good enough at wielding them, they allow you to forget that they exist. When a tool allows you to completely forget that you exist, we call it mastery. When it allows you to completely forget the tool exists, we call it luxury. (Alright, I'm going to quote the whole thing at this rate. Skip to end.) There’s fundamental-limit phenomenology around minimum-viable tooling. A machine that flies has to have a certain minimal complexity, and building one will take tooling of a corresponding level of minimal complexity. Periodically, there is a bout of enthusiasm in the technology world for getting past the current limits of minimum-viable tooling, and so you get somewhat faddish movements like the no-code/low-code.. Premature user-friendliness is the root of all toolchain jankiness.. Simpler, more user-friendly tooling is the result of improved understanding, not increased concern for human comfort and convenience.
    Kartik Agaram
    Srini K
    +2
    9 replies
    Copy to Clipboard
  • Mariano Guerra

    Mariano Guerra

    5 months ago
    "Tree-sitter - a new parsing system for programming tools" by Max Brunsfeld

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jes3bD6P0To

    Mariano Guerra
    Shubhadeep Roychowdhury
    2 replies
    Copy to Clipboard