kluck

4 ms·

1.
by kluck 7y ago
Their main worries with open-source seem to be: 1 Fear of losing control (over their vision and centralized design of computation and representation of the Wolfram language). This is just false, as they would be in control over their
2.
by kluck 7y ago
I never know when they talk about "Wolfram" whether they mean the company or the person. And then I think what an egomaniac one must be in order to name an invention/creation after oneself.
3.
by kluck 7y ago
Sort of Wolframs reply to why Wolfram is not open-source: https://blog.wolfram.com/2019/04/02/why-wolfram-tech-isnt-op...
4.
by kluck 8y ago
fyi, I found an old HN thread on a similar topic: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=626491
5.
Ask HN: Sw dev with more physical action, outdoors and with people
2 points by kluck 8y ago|2 comments
6.
by kluck 8y ago
Good analogy! btw. I asked the question a year ago whether this whole "boss as a service" was viable and I think it is one of those things that you can't really imagine until you tried it out. I am glad there is now the oppor
7.
by kluck 8y ago
- Concentrate on one thing. - Make something you need and would pay for. If it already exists somewhere, find a good reason why you need to do it at all (and not just use the existing thing). - No donations, let people pay for it.
8.
by kluck 8y ago
Thanks! I am reading HN for this kind of hints.
9.
by kluck 8y ago
Do not get blinded by enthusiasm. Think on your own. I had a startup, co-founder persistet on bad tech, never stood up to him. Startup failed - and all for the wrong reason. I basicly had two choices: speak up or leave and I did neither, dr
10.
by kluck 8y ago
Thank you for stepping in and trying to clarify. English is not my native language - that is why I sometimes struggle to explain myself better. The most valuable stuff you learn in CS study is the theory and that is exactly the stuff you mi
11.
by kluck 8y ago
I see this more clearly in hindsight. By pure accident I ended up in software development: My mother found this university, I did not have anything else on my mind at the time, just started studying, graduated and here I am 10+ years later
12.
by kluck 8y ago
I would argue it is not about the little facts, such as specific sorting algorithms, but its more about learning how to approach a CS task, how to abstract and how to reason about code. The colleagues I know that were not as lucky and could
13.
by kluck 8y ago
Studying does involve a big chunk of practial work, so you get both theory and practise. If you don't know the basics it would be very hard to do any "real-world development". So why do you think, 4 years are better spent try
14.
by kluck 8y ago
This seems optimized for creation of small apps (and is also presented very well). But what striked me watching the intriduction video: When you revisit your a written app, it seems hard to understand whats going on and also hard to get a f
15.
by kluck 8y ago
It seems programming bottoms up is the only way to go - consider coding with your bottoms down, quite embarrassing.
16.
by kluck 8y ago
This. Be a highlevel programmer: know enough languages to pick the right one for the task at hand. Do not take part in language wars.
17.
by kluck 8y ago
I am grateful that my father was using Linux exclusively pretty much from the mid 90s on and we never had another OS at home.
18.
by kluck 9y ago
Danny Wallace - Yes Man Clifford Stoll - The Cuckoo's Egg
19.
by kluck 9y ago
Physically a BitCoin is, when you look at it with your own eyes, nothing, not even air. And probably everyone knows what a fork is (metal thingy for eating stuff) ... so here is your answer. Everyone else who says otherwise, is probably emp
20.
Ask HN: How do you organize your notes and ideas?
4 points by kluck 9y ago|0 comments
21.
by kluck 9y ago
You are in a very good position: you can pay your bills AND you have some more time on your hands. Start an own side project instead of working for someone else. This is from a father who thinks this would be a dream come true ;) ... use yo
22.
by kluck 9y ago
> ... it's not a great language; Yes it is. > it's a clusterfuck of "cleverness" which lets "clever" people implement horrifying glass cathedrals that shatter as soon as you open the door. It is clever, s
23.
by kluck 9y ago
I begin to find the constant bashing of Perl amusing. Such a great language, people just use it and it gets stuff done. I have no explanation as to why people hate it, other than because most people just don't understand Perl.
24.
by kluck 9y ago
The problem is, money loss through poor software quality is (and maybe can) not be calculated in a way that, for example time (for development) can be measured. Often the arguments for increasing software quality, for example through refact
25.
by kluck 9y ago
As far as I can tell this is not open source. It seems to be a toolkit/framework and is supposed to be the basis of actual applications with focus on augmented reality. I don't think it will become widely used if the developers ar
26.
by kluck 9y ago
I watched the video some time ago and what bothers me is that the author pretends to have hacked Perl while in fact he just found that some people are using a commonly used Perl module (DBI) the wrong way whereas the right way is well docum
27.
by kluck 9y ago
Honestly, you are asking the wrong question. How can two turing complete programming languages even "compete"? I though about this a long time and came to the conclusion that it's not worth the effort to come up with an answe
28.
by kluck 9y ago
Reading through the changes it becomes abvious how rich a language Perl is. Just look at all the edge cases and fine tunings that this long time of development and improvement has generated. Its impressive. Anyone starting their own little
29.
by kluck 9y ago
Passion to me is when you come back to some activity weither you plan to or not, e.g. you think about a programming problem out of the blue while in the shower or walking the dog. The things you are passionate about are always there in the
30.
by kluck 9y ago
Revenue is about $6000 per month and the costs for running the site are probaly quite low, minus the costs for the owner himself, so maybe monthly profit is around $4000? So given the formula for non-internet companies which are valued arou

More ›