Some people see “free stuff”, and assume that it’s now open season on wasting OP’s time.

It’s a good way to kill any enthusiasm. Imagine your kid made a spaghetti portrait as a gift for you and instead of just accepting it you asked, “but what exactly did you do differently from all kids on the block?”

Why? Why ask for this from the creator?

If someone can create new software and offer it for free, they should not also be expected to also create a comprehensive analysis of what other people did and list of differences.

Just take it or leave it, it’s that simple. No need to act as if you’re trying to waste some door-to-door salesman’s time.

Edit: I expected some downvotes but not that many.

To my defense, the question in this thread is “you could elaborate what exactly you did different than all the others”. Look, I’m not a native English speaker either but I feel we could agree that is still pretty far away from simply being curious about design choices or “what led you to create this” sort of exploratory question.

I might have overreacted, though, so sorry for that.

That’s a noble goal but does adding more people help the (long-term only, please) effectiveness? At what point does it start hindering it?

I would assume that someone like a pharmacist has to be focused all the time, stakes is high…

Do we have precise data about how physiological state of a pharmacist is changing through the shift? Do we know whether or not the pauses between people – which we might or might not have considered a wasted time – are actually essential for their ability to stay focused and reliable? (Is the answer the same for all of them?) Or maybe they could actually still use part of that time in a productive way, right? Also, why is there lack of people in the first place?

Focusing solely on adding more people to the equation seems to neglect factors like this. This tells me that whoever this factoid is trying to impress is not someone who I would want to trust with managing a pharmacy (or anything except maybe some production line) in the first place.

Is “pharmacists seeing more patients” really a measure of something good? I’m a non-native English speaker so cut me some slack but all I can imagine is just longer queues in the pharmacy and more tired pharmacists (and people who now need to wait in the queue now).

The pic being blurred and all, I thought it’s going to be some dad joke around “pharmacist can see more patients”

Tip: find -type f | xargs head (but no it’s not comfy)

but I don’t think going to “one giant metadatafile” argument helps; personally my attention starts splintering far sooner than that. Most of the time, if I’m looking at meta-data of an object, I’m not just looking at that single object, I’m reasoning about it in relation to other data points (maybe other objects in the same collection, maybe not). If at some point I want to shift my focus from created_at to updated_at or back, I need that transition to be as cheap as eye saccade. So by splitting the data to multiple files you are sort of setting “minimal tax” already pretty high.

That said, for simple projects where you want to have as few dependencies as possible, I think it’s fine; it might or might not be better than raw-dogging your own format. I’ve actually implemented pretty much this format multiple times when I was coding predominantly in Bash. (Heck, eg. my JATS framework is pretty much using FAMF for test run state 😄 .) Just be careful: creating / removing files and directories can be a pretty risky operation – make a typo in (or fail refactoring) a shell variable and you might be just rm -rf’ing your own “$HOME”. It might be one of things you want to do less of, not more.

BTW, I chuckled because you turn from created_at to cre_at for no apparent reason. (I mean, if you like obscure variable names, fine by me, but then why would you call it created_at in the first file?)

BTWBTW, I love your site, I wish most of the web looked like that; the grey gives me sort of nostalgy :D Also you reminded me that I should give Kagi a try…

forget the hair, but the questions must be precise and well-formed :D

seriously (ish), if the hairdresser holds my hair 2cm away from the skin and asks if this length is ok, and their finger is like 2cm thick, i don’t know if they mean 2 or 4.

Oddly specific example, but I believe you.

Okay this is gonna be the last thing I say on this - a lot of the struggle that women today face comes from the idea that women only exist in relation to something or someone else, like children or a partner.

The thing is, in so many ways we all only exist in relation to each other. So you’re on to something, not necessarily exclusive to sex or gender, but yes that part is hard. And much worse because it also means that others are going to try and shape that relation and the power is barely ever balanced. It does help to realize that not all people are like that, but these things are really knowable, and everyone’s situation is unique.

Eg, your role is to start a family, wear makeup and take care of your appearance so that you are perceived as attractive and therefore valued

Honestly, that part is infuriating to me as well. and I hate what it does to women. My personal feelings about what makes a woman attractive / free are my own, but I find it somewhat offensive how boldly people make assumptions about it and even start to normalize or ostracize others for following standards.

Not sure if we can do about it in general, but I do appreciate people who don’t just bow down to the masses.

the work hasn’t been done to show this is the sole cause

sure but why is it relevant? OP isn’t saying that it is the sole cause.

careful with the straw, you might accidently build a straw man out of it :)

maybe I’m too much of an engineering brain, but I just want to cry when they put fingers in my hair and ask “about this long”?

Like, I know it’s not a rocket science but come on, that’s like 800% error bar.

Once, a lady had enough emotional intelligence to explain herself whether she meant “cut above the finger” or “leave below the finger”. I will never go to any other hairdresser (luckily she’s much younger than me so we could actually pull it off). I ain’t got time for these axe throwers.

that should be the price of two visits and two mirrors.

…and a few drops of your own blood, I assume, but nothing more.

you can just say “shorter than the top”.

does this mean anything, though?

I mean, could someone even possibly say “longer than the top” and be taken seriously?

(And no, no no, stop right there----don’t even think of reminding me that mullets exist.)

Basically a cigar butt with eyes, shut up it works for me.

I was not planning to comment (i am no better) but even if I was, this line pretty much disabled me for straight 5 minutes.

I’m a ROFLcopter now…

They say, 30 is the age where you have to decide which one you like more: tying your shoelaces or hamburgers.

I chose the latter.

Now I’m almost 44 and even undoing them feels too hard. 🙃

I thought those nursery rhymes were because of the cat.

gorilla slippers

Good dog, those things are freaking scary.

hoser has a new video on how Saudi Arabia is getting ready for that part.

Remember, it’s not about filtering out robots, it’s about filtering out dangerous (as in spam, malware, etc.) things.

I mean, If you’re reeeeeeally good and reeeeeeally precise and reeeeally fast … then maybe you’re as dangerous as the robot. Maybe it’s just safer to keep you out. 🙃

Yeah, I phrased it weirdly, but that’s what I meant.