Since the idea is to save the patient from degenerative disease, recovering non-autonomous functions might not be a requirement - he only need a healthy body for now. It's still hard, but more feasible I guess.
As someone who started using Clojure recently, the documentation has been the hardest part. Once I've understood something in the core lib, I'm blown away how well built it is, but it's been a confusing & misleading process getting in the meantime.
The design never bothered me, the issue I have is that docs are all over the place. I would like to see documentation consolidated, with improved completeness, and better search. To get there, it needs to be easier for developers to contribute to clojure.org, instead of spinning off their own version of docs, which seems to be the case at the moment.
Just for a glimpse of the documentation landscape, and what it's like getting started, here are the resources I've touched on:
* Main reference pages (recently redesigned) are nice for getting a high level gist of something, but I found it doesn't go in depth enough to really understand atom/transient/transducers/etc.  I walk away with a sense of: "sure, this all sounds good in theory".
* Main API docs are helpful for reference once you understand what's going on, also useful for finding new things to research elsewhere. 
* I've discovered there are wikis on the libs that have really good examples, but they're not complete, and I will still have to Google for more examples by people writing blog posts. 
* Clojuredocs has decent search, and sometimes people comment on a function with a good example. But most of the time comment unfinished code that's really misleading. 
* Google is really the best resource for finding examples, explanations, and idiomatic usage. There are a lot of idiomatic things that are hard to uncover, like to zipping is done by `(map vector [1 2 3] '(a b c))`.
* The #clojure IRC channel has pretty low response rate of actually getting help with something. As compared to #node.js/#python/#postgresql. The community is smaller, so it makes sense, but it's discouraging.
* There are quite a few other websites, but I haven't found them useful, so I never check them.  
Part of the new clojure.org update is that the site content is now in github and accepts contributions. The guides area is already being built out by community contributions and that will continue. See: https://github.com/clojure/clojure-site and http://clojure.org/community/contributing_site . Over time this should improve the situation with respect to having both good reference and good tutorial content in one place on the site.
#clojure has always been up and down in terms of volume. These days, there are upwards of 5000 people on the Clojurians slack channel and pretty constant and helpful communication for chat. Join at http://clojurians.net.
Any project that starts developing UI separate from code (in whatever order) fails at the fundamentals because there are interacting constraints, and both must fit business/political constraints as well.
Is this maybe a western cultural bias, that somehow God blesses you with talent and that's it? Some residue from aristocracy?
When you look at things like Japanese martial arts, it's all about learning from someone more experienced and lots of hard work. The limiting factor is your endurance, and the general sentiment is that "if someone learned before me, I can too".
I'm not sure about that specific instance of Japanese culture, but for East Asia I'd say fixed mindset was much more relevant. I grew up being told that I will never do anything great with my life (not in a mean you-are-stupid way, but just a seemingly "rational"/"realistic" world view that only a few very smart people can do great thing, and I'm not one of them).
The news is misrepresenting what is actually happening.
A judge ruled for a 48 hour ban of WhatsApp from telcos to try to coerce WhatsApp into releasing private chat information for an ongoing criminal investigation (wild guess: they want information from politically exposed actors due to the recent corruption investigations). There are precedents, and that's a tactic local judges are using to try to get cooperation from international private companies.
This is the actual fact, but the article is conflating that with Marco Civil and other regulatory attempts that have nothing to do with this particular court ruling.
My wife is a judge and she is not alarmed. She is terrified. We are green card holders and came back to the country 16 years ago. Tonight was the first time we had a conversation about leaving this place for good.
It's very interesting that we perceive this (public) shutdown as "dictator-like" behaviour while the US uses gag orders, laws and secret courts to force (tech) companies into complying. If you don't want to, you have to shut down your company (see Lavabit). Yet Brasilia is "anti-technology" (sic) because they're not abusing their power in secret.
Be cautious, I had a close friend have their Green Card seized while crossing the border back from Canada into the United States, even though he had documented evidence that he had spent 95% of the previous three years in the United States. He was a consultant, and traveled a lot, but thought he would hang out in Vancouver, BC for a while. Even though he only returned to Vancouver for a few days at a time, before going on the next engagement, and all engagements were in the United States, with a US employer, (And he was a Stanford Graduate) - they seized his GreenCard because his household goods (Mattress/clothing), had left the country more than a couple years ago, and used that as evidence of being away from the United States.
Lesson learned - Sometimes the border staff gets caught up on stupid technicalities. Be aware of them, and don't use common sense.
To further aid confusion, "Green Card" in Europe means a certification from your motor insurance provider that extends motoring insurance to the rest of the "green card countries" (which is basically Europe)
It's a confidencial investigation, you have no reason to believe it is a politically exposed actor. It can be any sort of investigation, this is highly manipulative. The people who actually created this block wants to make you think it's related to the Lava-Jato, but they are probably doing it due to lobbists from telecom industries.
They could fine facebook, the owner of whatsapp and that have offices in Brazil. It is unrelated to close the service. Has the Brazilian government ever closed Vivo or Tim because it had legal problems? No. They charge fines.
There are precedents, and they were absurd.
All the information on the article regarding Cunha is correct.
Not at all. When companies decline to obey local law, it's reasonable for them to be cut off from operating in that country. Which is what the judge is proposing, temporarily. Probably with longer cutoffs to follow if this doesn't inspire obedience of judicial orders.
Obeying duly authorized warrants or subpoenas is very reasonable. It's really not WhatsApp's job or right to pass judgement on the political system of a country. If WhatsApp doesn't like that, they should withdraw their business from Brazil.
And let's be serious; while Brazil may have problems, it's definitely not a dictatorship.
> Obeying duly authorized warrants or subpoenas is very reasonable.
Depends on the warrant or subpoena and the technology in question. If they have plaintext messages sitting around on a server somewhere, then perhaps they can supply the messages they've irresponsibly given themselves access to. However, WhatsApp claims to provide end-to-end encryption in some (though not all) cases, so they may not have the data in question; if so, a subpoena expecting them to supply it anyway wouldn't be reasonable. A subpoena expecting them to backdoor their client (in general or for a specific user) would not be reasonable.
And that's before getting into the "why" of the individual case, such as whether this has any more merit than the "take down this YouTube video because it embarrasses us" cases that caused Brazil to attempt to block YouTube previously.
Apart from that, a subpoena from a country only has legal meaning to a business with a legal nexus in that country. Providing a service via the Internet does not create a legal nexus in every country in the world.
> If WhatsApp doesn't like that, they should withdraw their business from Brazil.
What business in Brazil? I haven't seen anything in the stories or comments thus far to suggest that they have any legal nexus in Brazil. They have customers all over the world.
"[...] Folha learned that justice in São Bernardo do Campo wants WhatsApp stay out of air in the country due to a criminal investigation.
The authorities investigating the case obtained legal authorization for the WhatsApp broke the confidentiality of data exchanged via investigated by the application, but the company did not release the requested information. The blockade would be a reprisal.
In February, a similar case occurred in Piauí, when a judge also ruled WhatsApp lock in Brazil. The aim was to force the company that owns the application to cooperate with state police investigations related to cases of pedophilia.
The decision was suspended by a judge of Piaui Court after analyzing writ of mandamus filed by the telcos. [...]"