Just finished watching Master of None, season 2. What a great show. It’s hilarious without being campy, poignant without being a downer. Aziz Ansari is very good at this. Also, now I just want to listen to old Italian music and eat food.
Actually, I probably wouldn’t change much. But I have questions about this marketing photo:
- Just, no. Do not pose with apex predators, even the little ones. Not okay, Mr. Khaled. I know this isn’t a question?
- Why doesn’t said apex predator kitty get a matching robe?
- Are you, Mr. DJ Khaled, just a catchphrase soundboard? Have you, at any time, been a soundboard? Is this like a Blue Man Group thing where there are multiple, anonymous DJ Khaleds?
Thank you for your time, DJ Khaled. Grateful is actually pretty good pop music.
I have feelings about Muse, but let’s talk about this particular song I’m listening to right now: “Big Freeze” off The 2nd Law. In general, I would overgeneralize Muse’s music as “future-prog”. But this song has a) the typical fuzz bass Muse uses, b) nearly chicken grease guitar chords, and c) a distinct U2 vibe. I’m not sure these things all go together. If’d been the producer on this track, I’d have tried to convince them that chicken grease chords are cool as heck, but they don’t belong on any of Muse’s album tracks.
…but they’re going to have to deal with the fact that my wife and I commonly have exchanges like this:
Me: can you hand me the thingy from the thing?
Courtney: this one?
Me: which one?
Courtney: the one I’m pointing at
Me: I’m not looking at you
Courtney: this one
Me: the thingy!
Good luck, machine learners!
Is it too late to do hottakes for something that’s been around for nearly a decade?
- I can allow other sites to use my data with some confidence that, at least, my authentication information won’t leak
- It has made really cool stuff possible at my current workplace and workplace-2
- Libraries to make it happen in server-side apps are pretty good
- There are a bajillionty implementations and standard definitions of OAuth2 (for somewhat justifiable reasons)
- If you want to tinker with an OAuth2 API, you’re in a bit of hurt because you can’t just grab a token and start playing (mostly, depending on the implementer)
- Those open source libraries are the kind of thing that drive maintainers away pretty quickly 😬
Overall: would not uninvent this technology.
There’s a moment of despair when extracting functionality from a larger library, framework, or program. The idea grows, a seed at first and then a full-blown tree, that the coupling in this functionality isn’t all bad. A lot of people talk only about coupling and leave out cohesion. They aren’t mutually exclusive! When the two are balanced, it’s hard to come up with a reason to start extracting.
On the other hand, sometimes that moment of despair strikes when you start really digging into the domain and realize this chunk of functionality isn’t what you thought it was. Maybe it’s not coherent (see above!) or perhaps the model of the domain isn’t deep enough. This is a pretty good signal to hit the brakes on the refactoring, figure the domain out, and reconsider the course of action.
Feature envy rears its head in extractions too. Patterns of crosstalk between the existing thing and the new thing are a sure sign of feature envy. It’s tempting to say, hey maybe you really need a third thing in the middle. That’s probably making matters worse though.
That said, changing bidirectional communication to unidirectional is usually a positive thing. Same for replacing any kind of asynchronous communication with synchronous. Or replacing lockstep coordination with asynchronous messaging. Envy is tricky!
(I) often encourage starting a new service or application within your existing “mothership”. The trendy way to say this right now is “monorepo all the things” or build a “modular monolith”. I find this compelling because you can leverage a lot of existing effort into operationalizing, tooling, and infrastructure. Once you know the domain and technical concerns specific to the new thing, you can easily extract into its own thing if you need to. The other edge of a monorepolith is that path dependence is a hell of a thing. Today is almost certainly an easier day to split stuff out than tomorrow.
A thing to consider pursuing is a backend-for-frontend service in pursuit of a specific frontend. It doesn’t even have to serve an application. You may have services that are specific to mobile, desktop, apps, APIs, integrations, etc. Each of these may need drastically different rates of change, technical features, and team sets.
Probably don’t split out a service so that a bunch of specialized people can build a “center of excellence” for the rest of the organization to rely upon. This is a very fancy way to say “we are too cool for everyone else and we just can’t stand the work everyone else is doing”. On their best day, the Excellence team will be overwhelmed by the volume of work they have put in front of themselves to make Everything Good. On their worst day, they will straight give up.
If you split something out, realize you’re going to have to maintain it until you replace it. And you’re going to rebuild the airplane while it’s flying. If you’re not really into that, stop now. Just because you can’t stand Rails, relational databases, or whatever doesn’t mean you should jump into an extraction.
Human design: what went into deciding how a human-facing thing is made? How did they decide to put the infotainment screen there? Why are BMW dashboard lights orange-ish? Who designs gauges and do they know what they’re doing? What the hell is going on with Mercedes dashes? When will we stop using gearshifts? When will the scourge of the PRNDL knob leave us?
Mechanical design: i.e. why is this car the way it is from an engineering point-of-view? Why is the rear-engine 911 unique, special, and kinda dumb? What makes the BMW M1 a weird BMW and yet perhaps the most special? Why do Ferrari engines catch fire so frequently? Do BMW/Audi/Mercedes design their cars as sedans, coupes, or hatchbacks first?
History: What puts some brands, e.g. Ferrari and Porsche over the others? Is Audi interesting? What is the gestalt of Honda or Toyota? How did the Viper come to have a tractor engine and a Lamborghini body? How does a BMW M car become “the next coming of BMW Jesus?”
Emotion: What makes people think a car is special? What kind of person owns a Koenigsegg or Pagani? Why own a Lamborghini? Is it practical to drive a Ferrari touring car? When does an Acura TL make sense for someone who enjoys cars? What will enthusiast cars look like once electric cars are the norm; will we finally enter a world of boring aerolumps?
…amongst other things. So many questions, so many subjective answers. That’s what makes it fun!
use a well-worn framework when it addresses your technical complexities (e.g. expose functionality via the web or build a 3-d game) and your domain complexity (e.g. shopping, social networking, or multi-dimensional bowling) is your paramount concern
once you have some time/experience in your problem domain, start rounding off corners to leave future teammates a metaframework that reduces decision/design burdens and gives them some kind of golden path
frameworks may end up less useful as integration surface area increases
napkin math makes it hard to justify not using a framework; you have to build the thing and accept the cost of not having a community to support you and hire from
to paraphrase Sandi Metz on the wrong abstraction: “(Using) no abstraction is better than the wrong abstraction”; if you’ve had a bad time with a framework, chances it was an inappropriate abstraction or you used the abstraction incorrectly
The first few years of my career, I edited the wrong file all the time. I could spend hours making changes, wondering why nothing was happening, until I realized I’d been tinkering in the wrong place because I was misreading a file path or not paying close enough attention to control flow.
Fast forward to now, and I’m pretty quick to drop a
raise "BLORP" in code I’m tinkering with if things aren’t working like I think they should. All hail puts debuggerering.
However, it turns out I found a new class of this operator error today. I was diligently re-running a test case, expecting new results when the test fixture file I thought was changed was the wrong file. Once I deleted the right file, I was back on my way.
Joyful and grumpy are we who can find new ways to screw up time ever day!