
The Programmers' Stone - cristicismas
https://beautiful-programmers-stone.netlify.com/
======
cristicismas
Hello HN!

I've seen the programmers stone website a few times here and I've done a small
redesign to make it more readable for the modern web (both on desktops and
mobile devices).

The website is still lightweight and doesn't use any javascript, and I think
some of you will appreciate that.

~~~
throwaway40324
This is awesome, thanks!

If the paragraphs were set to wrap, I could actually read it on my phone when
zooming in.

I could zoom in and scroll back and forth on each line, but that's worse than
squinting.

Do you have time to do this? If not, will you accept pull requests, and or is
the source available to contribute to?

~~~
cristicismas
Everybody can contribute to the project. The source is at
[https://github.com/cristicismas/beautiful-programmers-
stone](https://github.com/cristicismas/beautiful-programmers-stone). I've
cleaned up a lot of the html to make the code easier to edit, but I forgot to
write the source in the initial post.

------
Noumenon72
If they're going to build their entire site around the "packers vs mappers"
metaphor, they need to do way more to explain and justify it than this:

> What is presented as socially conditioned conventional thinking (called
> packing) is based on action. To be a good bricklayer, a packer must know
> what a bricklayer does.

> To understand what programmers really do, an alternative strategy of
> thinking (called mapping) is necessary

The reason they don't put any effort into describing what "mapping" and
"packing" mean when applied to thinking, is that all they really mean is
"smart (like us)" and "dumb (like everyone around us)". Packers are compared
to illiterates, they're slow, they don't try to do better, they're illogical.
Packing = things we don't like.

Compare to useful categorizing like "lumpers and splitters" in taxonomy, where
both ends of the spectrum are respectable and worth keeping in mind as
heuristics.

------
29athrowaway
The first chapter does not reflect much empathy for the Japanese.

The authors could have made their point without showing such blatant
disrespect.

~~~
UnFleshedOne
I don't see any disrespect in there?

~~~
wendelscardua
Probably they are referring to things like this snippet:

Recognising the importance of mapping suggests another way of looking at what
has happened here. Mapping can certainly be reawakened by trauma. One possible
way to traumatise a person might be to:

1\. Nuke them. Twice.

2\. Rip apart their rigid, predictable feudal society.

3\. Tell them the invader will be coming around tomorrow.

4\. Leave them nothing for supper.

To eat tonight, this person is going to have to reawaken his ability to be
imaginative.

~~~
equalunique
I see how this could upset some, but whether or not it is either empathetic or
disrespectful is arguable.

