
Ask HN:  What have you changed your mind about recently? - amichail
For me, I now believe that hypnosis is a real phenomenon: http://www.sciencentral.com/articles/view.php3?article_id=218392595
======
phugoid
Something I read in Outliers by Malcolm Gladwell shocked me into reconsidering
my role as a father. I'm not a big fan of that book in general, but I found a
pearl in there.

I used to think that I needed to set and enforce hard rules, as if this will
teach my kids order. I don't want them to take the easy way out or try to
negotiate everything. I thought my approach was a good balance to my wife's,
as she doesn't assert much authority.

According to a study mentioned in Outliers, my style of parenting is prevalent
among the poorer social class, and it leads to a mindset of resignation.
Wealthier parents listen more to their children, negotiate with them, and help
them take their place in the adult world rather than just be quiet and follow
the rules.

This idea has connected a lot of dots for me, and I think I can be a better
father than I have been.

~~~
dstorrs
Don't be too hard on yourself, and don't go too far in the opposite direction.
Kids do want boundaries, and they are happier when they have them. Watching my
8-year-old nephew's behavior bears this out perfectly; when he's given lots of
input into plans and opportunity to negotiate, he acts like a demon and ends
up melting down and unhappy. When given rules he's a happy angel.

I think the trick is to not open the floor to negotiation. If kids have
reasonable objection or points you hadn't considered, they will raise the
point and you can modify the rule. If they know that they are "negotiating"
just to get their own way and that it won't work, they won't waste the time--
and everyone will be happier.

That's my experience, anyway.

------
pg
The late Roman empire, thanks to _Theodosius: The Empire at Bay_ :

[http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?bi=0&bx=of...](http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/SearchResults?bi=0&bx=off&ds=30&sortby=17&sts=t&tn=theodosius+empire+at+bay&x=0&y=0)

I used to have very unclear picture of the late empire. Without thinking about
it too much, I bought into the pervasive idea (probably due mostly to Gibbon)
that the late empire had lost its Roman mojo: that it had become barbarized
(what does that mean?) and worn out (why then?). Now I have a higher opinion
of the late empire. They lost largely because they faced harder problems. The
empire was depopulated, partly no doubt due to epidemics, and the barbarians
on the frontiers were a greater threat than they had been in the time of
Augustus.

I'm only half way through the book, but it's already the best thing I've read
on the period. It would be worth reading for their revisionist view of
Adrianople alone.

~~~
eugenejen
In "Mohammed and Charlemagne" by Henri Pirenne, the whole Mediterranean region
after collapse of the Roman empire still enjoyed prosperity. The economy went
down after trades in Mediterranean sea decreased due to Muslim Arabs had taken
control the area.

~~~
pg
It's a great book, but the Pirenne thesis has since been pretty thoroughly
debunked.

------
pasbesoin
Gun control in the U.S.. I used to be more in favor, with the goal of a safer
society as well as one less inclined to the isolation of sub-populations.

Now, I'm considering widespread ownership more in terms of a last bulwark
against one or another form of totalitarian rule. Perhaps it is a limiting
factor against pushing the population too far. You might call this a knee-jerk
reaction; nonetheless, it's on my mind.

I still consider most unfortunate the additional, lethal violence that the
ready availability of firearms (legal and illegal) seems to cause. The
question for me is, is it a -- I hate to use this term -- necessary cost.

I feel a little uncomfortable writing about this, nor do I claim to be
especially informed on the topic, but since you asked.

~~~
protomyth
About 15 years ago, I was at a state sponsored meeting in Minot ND. A group
the state hired was there telling us about risk factors in the community. The
group hired was from the west coast and all the research they cited was
studies done in low income urban areas. They pointed out guns were a big risk
factor. The head of one of the local social service programs took exception to
this. He asked how many people in the room owned a gun. With the exception of
myself, everyone raised their hands (my parents owned firearms and I never
bought one myself). He then started counting upwards and more then half owned
over 3 firearms. He felt the study had no relevance to the area. Examine
Switzerland for another example of prevalent firearms.

People inclined to do violence to others will do so regardless of the weapons
available. Swimming pools are more dangerous to children than firearms in the
house. My take has always been that the weakening of one amendment will allow
avenues of attack on the others.

~~~
Zarkonnen
Switzerland is actually a very bad example to use. The unusally (for Europe)
high number of firearms there is because the members of the militia army keep
an assault rifle at home. This is rather different from a handgun or a
shotgun, and you're not allowed to use them outside military training.

~~~
protomyth
In a lot of ways, I think it is a very good example. They have access and
advanced training (assault rifles are actually very hard to use). The fact
that the citizens obey the law and don't use their weapons for greater crime
is telling.

~~~
mistermann
Correct. Guns are not the problem, culture is the problem. But if you have a
bad culture, firearms can make it worse. But the reverse can also be true.

------
chasingsparks
PHP. It is neither useless nor used only by the contemporary version of AOL
proggie coders. For many things, it really makes life easier (e.g. deployment
via SCP).

~~~
chasingsparks
I was up voted more than I thought. I just wrote a blog post follow up.

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=904018>

------
booksnarf
Religion. I was born & raised a devout Baptist Christian (and creationist).
But in the past 5 months, I've read about 50 books and hundreds of web pages
and decided that agnostic atheism [1] and evolution make more sense.

Hopefully I didn't just devolve this into a religion argument...

[1] "Agnostic atheist" == I can't say for certain but I think God is very
improbable, and I will live my life on the assumption he is not there.

~~~
Alex3917
Same here, only the other way. After being an atheist my entire life, I got
more interested in religion over the past few months. After listening to
dozens of hours worth of podcasts, and reading a few books and academic
journal articles, I've decided that there is such a thing as a "primary
religious experience." Furthermore, it's pretty clear that while academia can
verify that this experience exists, science can't really go much further than
that, at least in its current state.

As to whether this experience is caused by contact with god, or the sacred, or
whatever, I'd put myself in your same "agnostic atheist" camp. Only I'd say
that I'll approach some future experiences on the assumption that God is
there. (Not that I'm going to go out and become super religious or anything,
but being able to suspend disbelief once and a while is the key to making
things fun, whether it's watching Star Wars or reading about Mysticism or
whatever.)

That's the real take away I think, that in the same way most people don't like
math because they were "mathematically abused" as kids, most people don't like
religion because they were religiously abused as kids. When actually learning
about religion is kinda fun and intellectually interesting.

~~~
araneae
The feeling of "spirituality" is certainly universal; after all, so many
people have it that it would be absurd to call it purely a cultural construct.
However, as far as we can tell, the generation of these feelings is not
associated with any external sensor, the way that the experience of seeing is
connected with your eyeballs. In all probability, the feeling of religiosity
is mind-bound phenomena, much like love and awe, and are not capable of
detecting any real external phenomena.

On another note...

I'm an atheist, but I wasn't religiously abused as a kid. I just am interested
in science. The fantasies of others is considerably less entertaining than
understanding the nature of the universe.

~~~
Alex3917
"In all probability, the feeling of religiosity is mind-bound phenomena, not
capable of detecting any real external phenomena."

That's an interesting use of the word probability.

Can you justify that position using arguments qualitatively different than
those used to justify the opposite position? (That the full-blown mystic
experience is qualitatively different than anything that science has ever
explained before or any experience generated from within the body, and thus
there is no reason to believe that it's necessarily scientifically explainable
or endogenous.)

As I said I'm actually more or less with you, I just see the logic of what the
other side is saying.

~~~
araneae
(tl;dr Science can explain these experiences, but people just don't find the
explanations satisfying.)

Many folks, religious or not, believe that many powerful experiences (like
love or religion) aren't scientifically explainable. However, I think it's
because such explanations aren't emotionally satisfying. Such explanations are
usually either proximate (i.e. mechanistic) or ultimate (evolutionary.) and
people just don't like that.

To use love as an example:

Proximate explanation: When two individuals have different MHC profiles, they
are more likely to smell good and be attracted to each other. This attraction
can sometimes lead to sex. After orgasm, the hormone vasopressin is released
which causes a warm fuzzing feeling in both partners. After repeated instances
of sex, there is a learned association of this nice feeling and being with the
other person leading them to hang out with each other a lot.

Ultimate explanation: individuals which pair bond, resulting in biparental
care, produce offspring which are more likely to survive to the next
generation than those which do not.

But no one likes to think about that when they're snuggling up to their mate.

"Religiosity" isn't so cut and dry as love. The proximate explanation of
spirituality is fairly well established by science i.e. religious experiences
can be induced artificially with drugs (psychobilin) or electrical stimulation
of the brain. The ultimate explanation I think is less convincing than for
love. Most evolutionary psychologists consider religion a byproduct of
adaptive psychological traits, such as superstitiousness (associating negative
events with some cause- it's more costly to fail to learn what causes negative
events than to associate unrelated events) and agency (a similar explanation-
it's adaptive to assume that most things are caused be agents, i.e. a rustle
in the leaves is a hungry predator, not the wind. If we assume it's the wind
and it isn't, we're in trouble, but not if it's the other way around.)

------
boredguy8
My biggest mental shift recently is an appreciation for ambiguity in language.
Three months ago, if someone would have asked me, "Can you gain important
topical insights from the ambiguous use of language?" I'd have said, "No, of
course not: if you aren't precise in what you discuss, that creates a barrier
to communication and makes things more confusing rather than clarifying.
Intelligence is, in a large part, the ability to make fine distinctions and
precise language helps make those distinctions."

I still see the value in precise language, but I now see it far more as one
more tool in my toolbox rather than "THE WAY THINGS MUST BE!" And I've also
come to see that my near-totalitarian enforcement of precision was prohibiting
me from using other tools.

By analogy: suppose you want to know more about butterflies. Certainly
catching them and pinning them to a spreading board is one way to study them:
you can measure them exactly, you can count their spots and identify their
coloration precisely. But you don't capture all that it is to observe a
butterfly that way--you don't comprehend its flight, its movement, its way of
being in motion.

Now, clearly I understand that, in a sense, I've only become 'more precise' in
my language, willing to 'evoke ambiguity' when precisely necessary. But I can
only protest that this fails to understand what I've gained from a willingness
to recognize the value of ambiguity.

~~~
mapleoin
So you've just discovered poetry?

~~~
boredguy8
I've long appreciated poetry for it's ability to 'get at' the world in ways
that I would consider rather precise. Metaphors are not a tool of ambiguity,
but rather precision.

Though I haven't read much poetry (nothing that doesn't appear in Harper's or
New Yorker): I'll have to go back and re-read some things to see in what ways
my interpretation has changed, if at all.

~~~
HistoryInAction
I'm partial to Kipling's "If," which should be quite popular among this crowd:
[http://www.everypoet.com/archive/poetry/Rudyard_Kipling/kipl...](http://www.everypoet.com/archive/poetry/Rudyard_Kipling/kipling_if.htm)

------
abyssknight
I changed my mind on event models in stateless protocols. I used to think,
"Oh, that sounds nifty. I bet it works really well, and simplifies the
wiring."

Now I think, "Wait, how can an event work in a stateless... Oh, that's just
sneaky Microsoft."

Not by choice, rather by circumstance, I have been writing Web Forms apps in
ASP.NET for the last year. Took me that long to realize that something about
the whole idea just doesn't make sense.

~~~
TeHCrAzY
I recently came upon MVC, and similary was enlightened re. the events within
ASP.NET WebForms. I highly reccomend checking out thier approach: its
incredibly flexible from a very low level.

------
novum
I've been thinking a lot about happiness, learning, and experiences.

When you get right down to it, we only have a few short years in the sun. 80
years is less than nothing when compared to the age of the earth - let alone
the solar system or universe - so it would appear rational to maximize your
experiences, knowledge, and relationships because they would seem to lead to
an increase in happiness.

One real-world consequence of this thinking is that I've found myself much
more likely to consider switching jobs than my risk-averse persona would
predict, especially if I see a new offer as a challenging opportunity to
improve myself.

------
ryandvm
The best way to implement health care in the United States.

<http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/print/200909/health-care>

~~~
HistoryInAction
I enjoy Ezra Klein as a left-perspective, wonky (politically technical, if
you're not familiar with the term) writer who has a special focus on the
intricacies of health care policy.

<http://voices.washingtonpost.com/ezra-klein/>

~~~
DanielBMarkham
Trivia note: "wonk" is a fairly new word, having been coined in the last
decade or two if I remember correctly.

It used to stand for WithOut Normal Knowledge, meaning people who had a lot of
ideas but not much practical experience. I think lately the definition has
broadened to mean just intricately technical.

------
rrhyne
Obama. He talked change and kept all the same financial advisers of the prior
administrations.

~~~
anonymousDan
What about all those paycuts for bankers though? I can't imagine those
happening under Bush or McCain. Or are they just cosmetic (I'm not American
and not overly familiar with the details)?

~~~
brown9-2
Cosmetic in that they only affect a handful of banks, and none of the major
profit-winners such as Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, Morgan Stanley, etc.

------
mixmax
I don't really want to be rich, I'd rather make interesting and fun stuff.

~~~
falsestprophet
Inverse here

------
RiderOfGiraffes
Whether I really belong here. I used to think it was a given, now I'm really
not sure. So much stuff I'm interested in gets completely ignored, and I'm
pretty sure it's been seen. There's the occasional zinger, but I no longer
think I'm a good match for this community.

~~~
DanielBMarkham
That's an interesting frame to the question -- whether you are a good match
for the community.

Wouldn't the question work better the other way around -- Whether the
community was a good match for you or not?

You would judge the answer based on how much the community helped you reach
your goals. Whereas with the other question you're always looking outward for
somebody else to validate you (which seems prone to getting bad feedback!)

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
Being a match is close to symmetrical, but "usefulness" perhaps isn't. I get a
great deal from this site and the musings of many of its participants. It's
only reasonable that I should try to give something back, but repeatedly
things I think are interesting get absolutely no response.

With me getting a great deal out, but the community not getting much back, are
we therefore a good match?

Perhaps that's not really the question, but I've come to realise that stuff I
think is cool, enlightening or simply interesting, generally get very little
response.

Unless people just don't see them.

~~~
TeHCrAzY
Or they have nothing to add to the discussion/your point.

~~~
RiderOfGiraffes
Usually if someone finds something find, interesting or enlightening they'll
up-mod it. I don't care about the karma, I care about things being thought
interesting enough to be up-mud.

------
steve19
Nobel peace prizes. I used to see them as the ultimate award that could be
earned and the ultimate award which humanity could bestow on an individual.
Now I see them as a powerful and influential political tool.

I think many people came to that conclusion many years ago ... I am a bit slow
on the uptake.

~~~
steve19
It would be great if a award, with a substantial prize (upwards of $10
million), was created to be awarded to the person that has done the most for
the human race: for peace, heath care, human dignity, human rights and
freedom.

Bill Gates .. you listening? ;)

------
alabut
NASA and the ability for a government program to be startup-like, as well as
my impression that test pilots were selected only for bravado.

I'm reading Carrying The Fire, a book by the Gemini and Apollo astronaut
Michael Collins. I was totally caught off-guard about how fast-paced, creative
and generally entrepreneurial the early space program was. A common
description of their working life was that people on a space mission put in
insanely long hours because they were captivated by the long term vision and
routinely made fun of other areas of the government where people were just
punching the clock.

Even working with otherwise disagreeable folk was tolerated. Collins on
learning that he'd have to work with John Young on Gemini 10:

" _...besides, I would have flown by myself or with a kangaroo - I just wanted
to fly. All that stuff about crew psychology compatibility is crap. Almost
anyone can put up with almost anyone else for a clearly defined period of time
in pursuit of a mutual object important to each._ "

Also, I thought test pilots were crazy people with a death wish, probably
because of The Right Stuff. Turns out they practice a form of user-centered
design and consider themselves as advocates for the end user (pilots in the
field). It doesn't surprise me that the current field of HCI was born from the
study of airplane cockpits. A joke in the book was about the true story of
emergency instructions printed on the inside of a canopy - all the steps after
the first one were completely unusable in the context of a real emergency
because step #1 was to blast off the canopy.

------
tel
My desire to become a doctor. As a college undergraduate in a biomedical
engineering major there's a lot of contact and allure toward that field, but
after extensive shadowing experience in the ER I realized that while I
undeniably admire those who can become doctors, there is absolutely something
missing, for me, in that profession:

The ability to innovate, build, create, explore. An MD's life is more oriented
toward dispensing the benefits of knowledge than actively seeking, crafting
more.

~~~
RK
Consider MD/PhD. The MD part of the degree gets you through a ton of doors
that would otherwise be closed or incredibly difficult to open
(unfortunately). It would also allow you to build products or perform research
and actually be on the clinical side of things when it comes to testing (if
you care).

~~~
tel
It is a consideration, but with the 10+ year path it takes to acquire it, I'm
a little shaken. At any rate, I'm looking at PhD in neurosciences so it'd be a
decent play with an MD if I wanted it later. I'm not certain that this still
lets you get MD tuition waived, but that would be excellent.

------
mapleoin
I now believe that C++ is a language worth learning (I haven't yet figured out
if it's also worth using for anything dependable).

~~~
ludwig
This. Learning to use modern C++ techniques (RAII, shared_ptr, boost, ...) was
especially eye-opening for me.

------
protomyth
This year has brought me to the belief that the forth estate is dead and has
been replaced by pundits of all shapes and sizes.

You can argue where every news organization fits on the political spectrum
(other than they all fit at one of the sides and the middle is an illusion),
but I don't think there is any network or newspaper that just prints the facts
of the case. Every network has their favorites and calls the other sides
"little people" names (e.g. pinko, teabagger). All the networks throw out
opinions and call them facts. Heck, making up crap doesn't even seem to phase
anyone (e.g. false papers, trucks with explosives on the gas tanks).

Has any network gone through the current draft of the health car bill and told
us what's on it? Has any network tried to get all the payouts the gov did as
part of the bailout?

~~~
mistermann
So true.

For example: <http://consortiumnews.com/2009/102409b.html>

This won't be on the news, yet I bet every American would have a strong
opinion (for or against) this practice....but it is not newsworthy. A boy who
may (or may not) be floating away in a balloon, however, gets 24x7 coverage.

Whats that saying about something becoming a parody of itself? Thats how I see
America today....they have such passionate beliefs about what they are as a
people, but their actions are the exact opposite. It's sad...of course, a lot
of this has been happening for decades, but what can be pulled off now in the
light of day with no public reaction (torture, war crimes, unprecedented
financial fraud, etc) is just mind boggling.

------
crystalis
I recently changed my mind about the quality of the producers and consumers on
HN.

~~~
icey
Can you clarify? You haven't been registered here for long, so I'm curious as
to what sort of trends you've noticed that have caused you to change your
mind.

~~~
crystalis
I've lurked longer than I've trolled. There is a surface appearance of
intelligence (thanks to a couple dozen prolific and intelligent participants)
but a great deal of unproductive conversations.

Too often, people talk past each other.

Too often, people nitpick like <http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=782752>

Too often, edw519 gets upvotes for 'pithy' statements like
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=864709>

Too often, reposts galore, and even worse, from techcrunch:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=743735>

Too much non-contributing irrelevant self-promotion:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/submitted?id=kkleiner>
<http://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=kkleiner>

Too often, votes are based on... zealotry?
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=902804> Why would jrockway get downvoted
for answering a question as to why OSX didn't merit the Apple Tax for his
purposes?

HN is useful for the domain knowledge and experience of some notable fellows,
but a lot of the active user base dampens a lot of the remaining signal.

~~~
mistermann
Good call on the singularityhub....

~~~
jacquesm
That one has been reported for a long time but nobody cares much about it.

I used to flag them consistently but I just gave up, so kkleiner wins that
round and gets to spam as much as he wants.

Flagging to keep out the spam is a way of doing community service, if the
feeling is that it is for nothing or possibly even ignored (PG hinted that
people that flag a lot have their flaggings discarded) makes me much less
inclined to do that work.

------
xayide
Seat belt laws. For years, my inner Libertarian would cringe at the idea that
the government could force someone to do something they didn't want to when it
was their own life at risk. But then my inner Republican realized that if I
were to be at fault in an accident, I would be financially and possibly
criminally liable for a much steeper offense if the other party wasn't buckled
up.

~~~
jacobolus
Not to sound harsh, but your logic here epitomizes the stereotype of
conservative as uncaring/greedy/self-absorbed. Instead of being concerned that
people will _die_ , your reasons for supporting seat belt laws is that it
_reduces your liability_. Maybe you actually have some concern for human life,
and don't actually intend to leave that impression; if not, it's worth
considering how you present your argument, because right away you've alienated
anyone who doesn't have a strictly utilitarian (or perhaps libertarian) view
of the world.

~~~
JangoSteve
I think maybe you missed something in his post. How is he being
uncaring/greedy/self-absorbed by acknowldedging how he is impacted by others'
decision to use a seatbelt or not?

He isn't saying people shouldn't wear a seatbelt. He's saying it should be
their choice. If someone chooses not to wear their seatbelt, they obviously
care more about their own convenience and comfort than their safety and well-
being. Why should he (or anyone else) worry about their lives more than they
do themselves?

Not to sound harsh, but I think that your logic epitomizes the stereotype of
the extreme liberal who thinks it's everyone else's responsibility to support
and take care of you. You've alienated anyone who doesn't have a strictly
socialist view of the world.

Of course, if you're not alienating someone, then you're probably not thinking
things through enough to form a strong opinion. So, good on you for having an
opinion either way ;-)

------
a-priori
I've been reading Steven Pinker's _The Blank Slate_ lately. It has changed my
view of the role of consciousness in everyday life. It's also clarified my
understanding on various social issues, the relationship with the individual
and society, and the evolutionary origins of the emotions.

I'm about 2/3 of the way through.

~~~
yan
Steven Pinker is amazing. From what I've read from his other articles, books,
etc, it's always been enlightening. He also does a beautiful job communicating
his ideas.

~~~
a-priori
I agree, his writings are eye-opening. I know a bit too much about
neuroscience, I think, so sometimes when he ventures that way in _The Blank
Slate_ I'm unconvinced, but the core of his arguments always stand.

My first encounter with his works was _The Language Instinct_ , which was
required reading for a course I took on psycholinguistics. If that were more
recent, I would have mentioned it in my initial post, because that book
completely changed my understanding of human language.

~~~
yan
Some of his writings is how I'm getting my introduction to neuroscience. Also,
following stuff like the brain science podcast and reading any popular science
books dedicated to it. I'd love to get more in depth, but currently lack
direction.

~~~
a-priori
Well, if you're looking for a textbook, I suggest _Biopsychology_ by Pinel. It
was required reading for two courses I took, and I found it to explain things
quite well. Something to watch out for though: he tends to over-simplify
things in places, which may lead you to develop overly-rigid mental models.
There are exceptions to every rule, and some recent papers may contradict what
Pinel says about the functions of some areas of the brain, or show that things
are actually more nuanced. It's still a good start.

Once you have a good grasp of the fundamentals, I suggest reading Nature
Reviews Neuroscience. They often have excellent review articles that summarize
the state of research in a particular area.
<http://www.nature.com/nrn/index.html>

If I were to suggest one area to focus your attention on, it would be memory.
Memory is a central ability of the mammalian brain, and pretty much every area
of the brain is involved in memory somehow. Here are some papers that I've
found enlightening:

Gaffan. Against memory systems. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal
Society B: … (2002)

Martin and Morris. New life in an old idea: The synaptic plasticity and memory
hypothesis revisited. Hippocampus (2002)

Frankland and Bontempi. The organization of recent and remote memories. NATURE
REVIEWS NEUROSCIENCE (2005) vol. 6 (2) pp. 119-130

Ross and Eichenbaum. Dynamics of hippocampal and cortical activation during
consolidation of a nonspatial memory. Journal of Neuroscience (2006) vol. 26
(18) pp. 4852

Dudai. The Neurobiology of Consolidations, Or, How Stable is the Engram?.
Annual Review of Psychology (2004) vol. 55 (1) pp. 51-86

Fischer et al. Recovery of learning and memory is associated with chromatin
remodelling. Nature (2007) vol. 447 (7141) pp. 178 (but don't worry too much
about the parts that are heavy on the biochemistry).

Rasch et al. Odor cues during slow-wave sleep prompt declarative memory
consolidation. Science (2007) vol. 315 (5817) pp. 1426

One thing you may notice is that all of these papers are published in the last
decade. That's about the shelf-life of research in this field. Let me know if
you can't find these articles online; I have PDF copies of all of them.

Hope that gives you some direction :)

------
snprbob86
I used vim to edit a config file here or there for four years of college. I
always hated it. I just couldn't wrap my head around command vs insert mode.
Since I never edited more than a few lines at a time, I never really learned
it. I thought it was just a stupid idea. Then, about 9 months ago, it clicked.
I started loving it. Now, you couldn't pry it from my cold, dead, Python
editing fingers. (Although, I still contest that IDEA/Resharper are far
superior for Java/C#)

~~~
steve19
did any particular tutorial make it click for you?

~~~
snprbob86
This in my vimrc helped tons:

    
    
      map <down> <nop>
      map <left> <nop>
      map <right> <nop>
      map <up> <nop>
    

But the big thing that really made it click was just that I used it for real
work, not small quick editing tasks. You have to really live in the app for a
while before it feels like home.

~~~
steve19
LOL, nice.

------
maxklein
I changed my mind about Django. In practical usage, it does not save time.
Most things are faster, stabler, more portable and easier to outsource than
Django. So, gone from being a Django enthusiast to making PHP my main web
language and Django for things like admin and cron jobish sort of things.

------
petervandijck
Now that I live there, Colombian food.

------
timinman
My political persuasions have changed radically over the last 20 years... And
I used to find politics interesting.

------
Klondike
Hacker News, after reading this thread. I think I'll become a regular.

