pckspcks

And, sadly, completely incorrect.

There are a half-dozen different groups of mainstream programming languages (and a bunch of oddballs). Within those groups, it's relatively uniform. Going between -- not the same.

Most people who make comments like this have only seen languages which differ in syntax, but many do differ in semantics.

Two comments:

1. There is large variation in TN displays. I'm very happy with the Acer TN panels I have at home. I find good TN gives me less eye strain than a lot of the IPS panels. IPS is the way to go for photo editing and similar tasks which require color calibration, but for coding, I actually prefer a good TN panel. Again, the trick is to find the right one. Try them at a store, for example.

2. Consider getting one 4k, and keeping the 1080p monitors. I have a 5 display setup like that. It works pretty well, actually. The 4k is great as a main display, and all the auxiliary stuff lives on the 1080p panels.

That both does and doesn't help. There is the format, which looks sensible. There are the protocols around it, key generation, salt generation, overall design, etc. which are not.

What actually scares me about the design is if my machine is compromised, an attacker can grab my Password Safe file (plus keylogs or whatever) and has access to all of my passwords. The design seems not very robust at a designs+protocols level.

(In contrast, right now, if a machine is compromised, it only compromises the passwords I've used from that machine).

I like Bruce. I trust Bruce. However, as far as I can tell, this is a black box. There is no documentation on formats, protocols, and similar. I have no reason to trust the security of this system. The closest I could come would be to read the source code.

I'm at a startup where I found out a junior hire -- worse in every way than myself and several steps down in title -- is making at least 30% more than I am. It's a strange position. I've started polishing my resume as a result.

Work as few or as many hours as you like. That's a pretty big benefit of contractors.

I found this one of the most useful books I've read, but less so for the physics (which was mostly an intellectual curiosity), and more so for understanding how to write good code.

In it, Sussman shows you how to:

* Write a Lagrangian

* Symbolically convert it into Lagrange's Equations

* Compile those into native code

* Numerically integrate the with an optimized numerical algorithm to get a path of motion.

And all of this, with beautiful, clean, concise, simple code.

A-fing-mazing.

Correct. In contrast to Newtonian mechanics, Lagrangians and Hamiltonians completely describe essentially all fundamental laws of physics -- including things like quantum and relativity.

However, they are cumbersome to work with for some complex, compound phenomena, such as friction.

Yes it does. I'm confused why you believe it doesn't....

Well, in this case:

1. The technical solution is trivial. You always have encryption, but http=self-signed cert, and no authentication, and no lock icon. https=CA cert, encryption, authentication, and lock icon.

2. There are strong government and corporate interests in being able to filter the open web. This closes the open web.

3. For the first time in my life, I have a comment on Hacker News or Reddit at -4. I've posted much more controversial things before (I do care about anonymity; I do use one-off cypherpunks accounts, so my post history won't indicate things). Good debate was virtually always well-received, up-voted, and not censored. The only exception was here, and one place where there was a strong, clear, well-financed astroturf campaign. That's one datapoint, but overall, the debate on the topic smells of financed astroturf rather than genuine grassroots.

Nope. The goal is to make running a server only available to corporate entities. It reduce competition from folks like yourself.

I don't know anyone who can sustain 80 hour work weeks if they're not passionate about what they're doing and enjoy it. People who try to do it just for the money do it for a while, and then either turn into cheaters (as the article documents), or burn out and move onto more fulfilling careers.

Doing something you're passionate about and having an impact on the world is living. It is much more living than going to a job you don't give an f- about for 40 hours per week so you can buy a house in the suburbs and an SUV, retire after 40 years, and then die having left no impact on the world.

It's false in the typical case. It's true in the atypical case, where the worker genuinely cares about the job. Earlier in my career, I had sustained 70+ hour work weeks at very high levels of productivity. In the process, I've personally conservative generated tens of millions of dollars of value. That moved me into my current position.

I know a number of other folks like me. I'm not unique here. It's that sort of person that you want to hire.