- a git explainer centered around git internals, serving as an indictment of git's ux
- a parser for a restricted subset of yaml, serving as an indictment of yaml's excesses
on the front page yesterday:
- an rsync explainer centered around rsync internals, where part 1 details how rsync is wrapped in a dockerfile and a perl script in order to be made useful
- a sad thinkpiece on how baroque the web has become
on the front page the day before:
- a go utility weighing in at tens of source files that implements what should be a built-in feature of AWS
- an article on encapsulation in rust, the buried lede of which is "you must audit your transitive dependency graph in order to retain the benefits of rust"
Possibly it's because it's hard to get things right the first time, but sometimes it's better than the old way so there's a big shift to it, and once we know a better way it's hard to shift people to the better thing because the old thing was just good enough.
Come to think of it, this probably applies to any product.
Exploration? Who knows, maybe we will all replace our yaml with perl at some point. Maybe not. But it is definitely good to see these somewhat crazy experimentations. That is how we move forward.
I meant it in the sense of Ivan Illich's "Tools for Conviviality" [0], in which he addresses even your misunderstanding[1].
> My purpose is to lay down criteria by which the manipulation of people for the sake of their tools can be immediately recognized, and thus to exclude those artifacts and institutions which inevitably extinguish a convivial life style. Paradoxically, a society of simple tools that allows men to achieve purposes with energy fully under their own control is now difficult to imagine.
> The hypothesis was that machines can replace slaves. The evidence shows that, used for this purpose, machines enslave men. Neither a dictatorial proletariat nor a leisure mass can escape the dominion of constantly expanding industrial tools
> The crisis can be solved only if we learn to invert the present deep structure of tools; if we give people tools that guarantee their right to work with high, independent efficiency, thus simultaneously eliminating the need for either slaves or masters and enhancing each person’s range of freedom. People need new tools to work with rather than tools that “work” for them. They need technology to make the most of the energy and imagination each has, rather than more well-programmed energy slaves.
1. "After many doubts, and against the advice of friends whom I respect, I have chosen “convivial” as a technical term to designate a modern society of responsibly limited tools. In part this choice was conditioned by the desire to continue a discourse which had started with its Spanish cognate. The French cognate has been given technical meaning (for the kitchen) by Brillat-Savarin in his Physiology of Taste: Meditations on Transcendental Gastronomy. This specialized use of the term in French might explain why it has already proven effective in the unmistakably different and equally specialized context in which it will appear in this essay. I am aware that in English “convivial” now seeks the company of tipsy jollyness, which is distinct from that indicated by the OED and opposite to the austere meaning of modern “eutrapelia”, which I intend. By applying the term “convivial” to tools rather than to people, I hope to forestall confusion." (Illich)
- a git explainer centered around git internals, serving as an indictment of git's ux
- a parser for a restricted subset of yaml, serving as an indictment of yaml's excesses
on the front page yesterday:
- an rsync explainer centered around rsync internals, where part 1 details how rsync is wrapped in a dockerfile and a perl script in order to be made useful
- a sad thinkpiece on how baroque the web has become
on the front page the day before:
- a go utility weighing in at tens of source files that implements what should be a built-in feature of AWS
- an article on encapsulation in rust, the buried lede of which is "you must audit your transitive dependency graph in order to retain the benefits of rust"
why do so many technologies feel like self-harm?