ivan/site
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

change philosophy html

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Rawley Fowler
2022-11-28 16:05:50 -06:00
parent 0bf65d32b5
commit 75046ba14c
1 changed files with 65 additions and 59 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

124
html/philosophy.html
View File

@@ -8,107 +8,113 @@
<link href="/static/index.css" rel="stylesheet"> <link href="/static/index.css" rel="stylesheet">
<style> <style>
h4 { h4 {
font-size: 1.2em; font-size: 1.2em;
} }
h5 { h5 {
font-size: 1em; font-size: 1em;
} }
i:before, i:after { i:before, i:after {
content: "`"; content: "`";
} }
</style> </style>
</head> </head>
<body> <body>
<header> <header>
<h1> <h1>
<a href="/">/home/rawley.xyz</a> <a href="/">/home/rawley.xyz</a>
</h1> </h1>
<nav> <nav>
<li> <li>
<a href="/blog">blog</a> <a href="/blog">blog</a>
</li> </li>
<li> <li>
<a href="/resume">resume</a> <a href="/resume">resume</a>
</li> </li>
<li> <li>
<a href="/philosophy">philosophy</a> <a href="/philosophy">philosophy</a>
</li> </li>
<li> <li>
<a href="/web-ring">web ring</a> <a href="/web-ring">web ring</a>
</li> </li>
</nav> </nav>
</header> </header>
<main> <main>
<h3>Philosophy</h3> <h3>Philosophy</h3>
<h4>The Problem with Modern Computing</h4> <h4>Modern computing and the modern mindset</h4>
<p> <p>
As computers get faster get faster, code quality and performance get's worse. The tragectory of the software world As computers get faster get faster, code quality and performance get's worse. The tragectory of the software world
(particularily in the web dev sector) is to produce solutions to problems, without considering (particularily in the web dev sector) is to produce solutions to problems, without considering
performance, optimization, and availability. How many billions of CPU cycles have been performance, optimization, and availability. How many billions of CPU cycles have been
lost rendering SPA's and PWA's? In reality, computers are limited tools for communication, mathematics, lost rendering SPA's and PWA's? In reality, computers are limited tools for communication, mathematics,
and entertainment, not for loading 2MB JavaScript payloads, that in turn render the page. and entertainment, not for loading 2MB JavaScript payloads, that in turn render the page. This way of computing is almost synonymous with the world views of most "modern" people.
</p> </p>
<h4>Solve Your Own Problems</h4> <h4>Solve Your Own Problems</h4>
<p> <p>
These ideas also, drastically effect the availability of software. Most software nowadays is horrifically bloated. These ideas also, drastically effect the availability of software. Most software nowadays is horrifically bloated.
It's not rare to see 2GB `node_modules` folders when working on Node.js projects, and the best part is, half of It's not rare to see 2GB `node_modules` folders when working on Node.js projects, and the best part is, half of
the packages are just simple packages like `isOdd` and `isEven`. How lazy have developers become? We reach for the packages are just simple packages like `isOdd` and `isEven`. How lazy have developers become? We reach for
pre-made solutions to well-defined problems when we could easily write our own without exposing our software to pre-made solutions to well-defined problems when we could easily write our own without exposing our software to
potential security vulnerabilities, and inturn reducing bloat. Some developers will argue potential security vulnerabilities, and inturn reducing bloat. Some developers will argue
"why do it yourself when I can get a premade solution, that I know works!" Sure, download that dependency, link that "why do it yourself when I can get a premade solution, that I know works!" Sure, download that dependency, link that
project to yours, but know this. You will <b>never</b> develop anything truly unique if the solutions to <u>your</u> project to yours, but know this. You will <b>never</b> develop anything truly unique if the solutions to <u>your</u>
problems are solved by people smarter than you. Simply put, how do you think the library creators made it to the level problems are solved by people smarter than you. Simply put, how do you think the library creators made it to the level they're at today? Heck, even most library code isn't particularly smart, so what's the excuse?
they're at today?
</p> </p>
<p> <p>
Packages also, can make us feel very productive. This is something that Jonathan Blow points out in one of his talks, Packages make us feel very productive. This is something that Jonathan Blow (a very critical and influential programmer) points out in his talk about developer productivity.
Blow mentions that high-level languages, and libraries make us feel like we're doing a lot more than we really are. Blow mentions that high-level languages, and libraries make us feel like we're doing a lot more than we really are.
Ken Thompson and company wrote most of Unix in 3 weeks; an entire operating system, kernel and all. Compare this to Ken Thompson and company wrote most of Unix in 3 weeks; an entire operating system, kernel and all. Compare this to
the most "productive" day of a web developer. Blow demonstrates in his talk that as companies progress they hire more the most "productive" day of a web developer. Blow demonstrates in his talk that as companies progress they hire more
and more people, but the products and codebases of the companies rarely change drastically enough to warrant this. Meta and more people, but the products and codebases of the companies rarely change drastically enough to warrant this. Meta
for example, employs 71 thousand people as of 2021, how often does Facebook, Instagram, or WhatsApp change? for example, employs 71 thousand people as of 2021, how often does Facebook, Instagram, or WhatsApp change?
To put it nicely, most developers don't do very much at all. To put it nicely, most developers don't do very much at all.
(To put it in math terms where p(x) = productivity per employee, and x = number of employees, (To put it in math terms where p(x) = productivity per employee, and x = number of employees,
Lim x -> &infin; p(x) = 0). Lim x -> &infin; p(x) = 0).
</p> </p>
<p> <p>
It is far more interesting, educational, and engaging to solve problems, rather than use a pre-built solution. Developers It is far more interesting, educational, and engaging to solve problems, rather than use a pre-built solution. Developers
will create truly unique, and engaging solutions that can be iterated and improved, when needed without having to pester will create truly unique, and engaging solutions that can be iterated and improved, when needed without having to pester
library maintainers. And to top it all off, your solution will be unique to your workload and problem. You will be solving library maintainers. And to top it all off, your solution will be unique to your workload and problem. You will be solving
your problem better than something generic. your problem better than something generic.
</p> </p>
<h4>The Core 2 Duo Standard</h4> <h4>The Core 2 Duo Standard</h4>
<p> <p>
Software before the 2010's had to take into account the machines that they were running on, in turn Software before the 2010's had to take into account the machines that they were running on, in turn
causing software to be developed in a more intimate way, focusing optimizations rather than features. causing software to be developed in a more intimate way, focusing optimizations rather than features.
Machines were fair, but not powerful. Think, Intel Core 2 Duo, 2-4gb of DDR2. This hardware is actually very good, Machines were fair, but not powerful. Think, Intel Core 2 Duo, 2-4gb of DDR2. This hardware is actually very good,
and in my opinion as much as an average person needs (even today). and in my opinion as much as an average person needs (even today).
If you write software (outside of graphics programming, games, etc), and it can't run on a Intel Core 2 Duo, you need to seriously If you write software, and it can't run on a Intel Core 2 Duo, you need to seriously
re-think what you're doing, and how you're doing it. re-think what you're doing, and how you're doing it. This for obvious reasons does not take into account GPU bound tasks.
</p> </p>
<p>
I believe that the hardware limitations of the pre 2010's were what drove the software quality gold rush of the time.
Most software released during those times is still around, sure there may have been some un-forseeable security issues,
but that software was really good. BSD's, Linux, Unix, Emacs, etc, staples of the software world, beautifully hand crafted
by developers who actually care (because they had too!). If they didn't care about their software and took shortcuts, their software
would suffer as a result. A stark contrast to today, where most developers are most concerned with their "industry standards", and "design patterns".
</p>
<h4>Conclusion</h4> <h4>Conclusion</h4>
<p> <p>
Do it yourself. Only use what you need. Take ownership of your work. Do it yourself. Only use what you need. Take ownership of your work.
</p> </p>
<p> <p>
It's really a beautiful and unique way to approach software, and to an extent, your life. It's really a beautiful and unique way to approach software, and to an extent, your life.
I find much more gratification and self purpose when I solve my own problems indepdent of pre-existing solutions I find much more gratification and self purpose when I solve my own problems indepdent of pre-existing solutions. This isn't meant to scare people from taking inspiration or even copying existing solutions. But rather meant to inspire a sort of creative, and exploratory spark. Even if you were to copy an algorithm or program from an existing one,
(obviously you can still take inspiration from others). I still bet you'll know it far better than anyone who simply installs it.
The world would be a much better place if we focused more on what we need vs. what we want. This is especially powerful The world would be a much better place if we focused more on what we need vs. what we want. This is especially powerful
in software, but can also be applied to how your own happiness. Finally, taking ownership and responsibility of your in software, but can also be applied to how you view the world. Finally, taking ownership and responsibility of your
work will make you better at the work, and also, a more pragmatic person overall. work will make you better at the work, and also, a more pragmatic person overall. Putting it all together, you can find the undeniable power of self-sufficieny and proficiency.
</p> </p>
</main> </main>
<footer> <footer>
<hr> <hr>
<p> <p>
Copyright &copy; Rawley Fowler 2022 Copyright &copy; Rawley Fowler 2022
</p> </p>
<p> <p>
<b>Disclaimer</b>: All opinions on this site, are that of my own. They do not <b>Disclaimer</b>: All opinions on this site, are that of my own. They do not
reflect the opinions of any of my employers; past, present, or future. reflect the opinions of any of my employers; past, present, or future.
</p> </p>
</footer> </footer>
</body> </body>