jlukic

Saw the window was a bit laggy so thought I'd delve deeper to figure out what was going on.

This lib runs a a RAF animation loop every 8ms across every component on the page that causes the entire document to repaint.

The comment above appears of the AI generated sort: // One shared animation frame: step every live component, park when idle. // The delta is capped so a background-tab pause never becomes one giant step.

The "JellyEngine" instead of just calculating the jelly animation on pointer events is recalculating for every active component on the page every frame.

This is the kind of thing usually a human notices and says 'dont do that, that is kind of crazy'.

I’ve been on Tysabri for 3 years. I think anyone looking at this problem should just at the network meta analysis of outcomes from DMTs. You can think through each options risk profile, and then make a reasonable choice for your preferences. consensus.app is a good starting place for evaluating the research quickly.

if anyone needs to discuss i’d also be happy to share my experiences if you reach out.

It’s worth noting this was written by maybe the person with the most experience in the space i can think of—-the primary author of Lit / Polymer working at web components on Google and contributing on many core DOM specs that have become part of the web platform.

The main problem with this approach is that there’s a normal distribution of quality of contribution for OS but the community of OS users only benefits from the highest quality contribution. This is normally best achieved by the continuous contribution of the original author(s) who created or maintain the project, as they were the ones capable of designing a project complete and correct enough to achieve traction.

Most projects will actually deteriorate in overall quality if they accept average level contributors work, and certainly face harsh consequences if they accept below average contributions. Highly competent contributors demand higher salaries for their work which can’t be met by the limited funds available to OS, hence most high quality work comes from company sponsored OS or from people who have other means of financing their lifestyle outside of open source.

Roundabouts always make think about the two parts of problem optimization, determining your objective function then optimizing. Many classical failure states for real world problems seem to involve having an OF that is incorrect then prematurely optimizing. Think of the rich guy who wants “love at all costs” and then pursues women with expensive gifts and fancy restaurants. You may achieve your aim but perhaps you won’t get what you want.

I think the same is true of roundabouts. One part of the experience that seems almost never to be mentioned is the experience for a passenger when encountering a series of roundabouts. Let’s say you had some bad oysters and are resting your head in the back of the car on a pillow and praying you can make it home before you upchuck your dinner. Perhaps some road engineer decided to put 5 or so roundabouts consecutively to “optimize traffic flow” then somewhere around spin number 3 you lose your stomach on the backseat. Perhaps the trip was not “optimal” for you.

The Design of Design was one of the primary inspirations for my open source project Semantic UI.

"[Progressive truthfulness] is perhaps a better way to build models of physical objects...Start with a model that is fully detailed but only resembles what is wanted. Then, one adjusts one attribute after another, bringing the result ever closer to the mental vision of the new creation, or to the real properties of a real-world object

...Starting with exemplars that themselves have consistency of style ensures that such consistency is the designer's to lose."

Frederick Brooks - The Design of Design

Nice vignette, thanks for sharing this.

I find this website to be a fairly amusing example of how marketing co-opts real, generally easily expressible ideas to be an amalgamation of highly targeted jargon and pointed funnels for personal information collection.

Generally any well intentioned person who worked on an idea like this would be delighted to share what their product does specifically and clearly - unashamed screenshots of interesting visualizations (maybe half cooked), telling descriptions of specific numbers being crunched and their utility as predictive indicators of project success, verified with statistical certainty.

Sadly this kind of naive, honest approach is very regularly usurped by the machiavellian machinery of the professional art of convincing others to buy things, which is narrative focused and story driven with very little concrete substance.

Not blaming the author here, I understand the motivations at work and sympathize with them, but still sometimes find myself dumbfounded by the results.