As it turns out I chose to learn Vue.js but nobody is really hiring for that. It's all react these days with a little Angular sprinkled in. Although after 25 years of doing this job I still feel Vue is superior to the other two in every way.
Although I see most hiring being done for React, many single-person projects use Vue.js. So I think there is truth to what you are saying. Would you be able to elaborate a little why you find Vue.js to be superior to React?
I sympathize, and I hate to complicate matters, but I took a look at that book and the publication date is nearly two years ago. Lots has changed in the ecosystem as well as React itself in that time, and in the styles of React code that people tend to write these days.
I don't know about the book itself, and I'm sure it's helpful in learning the fundamentals, but for much beyond that I'd be concerned it's a bit out of date. To be clear, I don't think anything from those days would be broken, as the React team has been careful about breaking changes. But some approaches that have developed since then might be hard to comprehend if you haven't encountered them, and some things can be done quite a bit simpler than was the case two years ago.
This week, I’m reading Nate Silver’s The Signal and the Noise. I picked this up after finishing Oliver Sacks’ The Mind’s Eye last week – both are hauls from a library book sale a couple years ago. I also recently read Don't Look Now And Other Stories (a Daphne DuMaurier collection), & I'm working my way through PKD's little-known hardboiled novel Humpty Dumpty In Oakland and another book (called "The Book") that's a history of the codex format.
The Mind’s Eye is, like most of Sacks’ books, a series of compulsively readable case-studies with an autobiographical element – in this case, the overarching theme is the way people produce elaborate adaptations in order to remain functional when some of their faculties are removed, such as partial or total blindness late in life or the loss of the ability to speak or read.
The Signal and the Noise is shaping up to be a sort of forgettable retread – Silver isn’t a poor writer, but he’s not enough of a stylist to make the book compelling (the way Christian Rudder did with similar material in Dataclysm), and meanwhile, aside from some specific details about topics I don’t care very much about (like the names of specific election forecasters), the material seems to be composed mostly of things I’ve already read elsewhere – Tetlock’s fox/hedgehog model of personality, some stats 101 best practices, warnings about apophenia, a quick rundown of bayesian logic. This almost certainly belongs in that second tier of popular science books, where neither the ideas nor the style are shiny enough to somebody with a casual interest in the subject to justify the price of the thing (but I spent a dollar on it, so I don’t mind so much).
The DuMaurier collection was great. She has the kind of easy cruelty I associate a bit with Matheson, but moreso with the adult short fiction works of Dahl & Salinger (who I guess she was competing with for space in the men's magazines); unlike Matheson, she is hesitant & subtle with supernatural elements. Every one of the stories in the collection could have been an episode of the 70s anthology series Tales of the Unexpected.
Humpty Dumpty In Oakland is about on par, in terms of polish, with Dick's later work like A Scanner Darkly, but it's got his trademark circular amphetamine monologues too. It switches perspectives between two characters & it's sometimes hard to tell which is which because their inner voices are the same & they have similar problems.
The Book is very pretty (with glossy full-color pages), but thus far it hasn't actually told me anything about books that I didn't already know (as someone who has configured printing for self-published stuff & also has read some antique volumes).
Next in my queue is a general-audience introduction to cognitive science from 2000 called Mindware, whose author I have forgotten.
Over the course of my vacation (a few weeks ago), I managed to finish several books that I had previously started, and read a couple new ones all the way through:
* C. S. Lewis’s That Hideous Strength combines some campus-politics satire with weird arthuriana in the style of The Dark is Rising and is political in ways that sometimes remind me of 1984, but the main appeal is how utterly alien Lewis’s political positions (which he takes to be obvious & universal) are to me. By the end of the book, it becomes clear that the previous books in the series are some kind of John Carter style sword & planet SF, & that this entry is a departure in genre.
* Andrew Pickering’s The Cybernetic Brain is full of interesting technical & biographical detail I wasn’t aware of from a lifetime of being casually interested in cybernetics, & makes some interesting meta-philosophical points about cybernetics as a discipline being performance-oriented. He claims that the way that cyberneticians are interested in the performative aspects of processes as opposed to a focus on categorization & situat...
4 comments
[ 3.0 ms ] story [ 18.1 ms ] threadAs it turns out I chose to learn Vue.js but nobody is really hiring for that. It's all react these days with a little Angular sprinkled in. Although after 25 years of doing this job I still feel Vue is superior to the other two in every way.
I don't know about the book itself, and I'm sure it's helpful in learning the fundamentals, but for much beyond that I'd be concerned it's a bit out of date. To be clear, I don't think anything from those days would be broken, as the React team has been careful about breaking changes. But some approaches that have developed since then might be hard to comprehend if you haven't encountered them, and some things can be done quite a bit simpler than was the case two years ago.
The Mind’s Eye is, like most of Sacks’ books, a series of compulsively readable case-studies with an autobiographical element – in this case, the overarching theme is the way people produce elaborate adaptations in order to remain functional when some of their faculties are removed, such as partial or total blindness late in life or the loss of the ability to speak or read.
The Signal and the Noise is shaping up to be a sort of forgettable retread – Silver isn’t a poor writer, but he’s not enough of a stylist to make the book compelling (the way Christian Rudder did with similar material in Dataclysm), and meanwhile, aside from some specific details about topics I don’t care very much about (like the names of specific election forecasters), the material seems to be composed mostly of things I’ve already read elsewhere – Tetlock’s fox/hedgehog model of personality, some stats 101 best practices, warnings about apophenia, a quick rundown of bayesian logic. This almost certainly belongs in that second tier of popular science books, where neither the ideas nor the style are shiny enough to somebody with a casual interest in the subject to justify the price of the thing (but I spent a dollar on it, so I don’t mind so much).
The DuMaurier collection was great. She has the kind of easy cruelty I associate a bit with Matheson, but moreso with the adult short fiction works of Dahl & Salinger (who I guess she was competing with for space in the men's magazines); unlike Matheson, she is hesitant & subtle with supernatural elements. Every one of the stories in the collection could have been an episode of the 70s anthology series Tales of the Unexpected.
Humpty Dumpty In Oakland is about on par, in terms of polish, with Dick's later work like A Scanner Darkly, but it's got his trademark circular amphetamine monologues too. It switches perspectives between two characters & it's sometimes hard to tell which is which because their inner voices are the same & they have similar problems.
The Book is very pretty (with glossy full-color pages), but thus far it hasn't actually told me anything about books that I didn't already know (as someone who has configured printing for self-published stuff & also has read some antique volumes).
Next in my queue is a general-audience introduction to cognitive science from 2000 called Mindware, whose author I have forgotten.
Over the course of my vacation (a few weeks ago), I managed to finish several books that I had previously started, and read a couple new ones all the way through:
* C. S. Lewis’s That Hideous Strength combines some campus-politics satire with weird arthuriana in the style of The Dark is Rising and is political in ways that sometimes remind me of 1984, but the main appeal is how utterly alien Lewis’s political positions (which he takes to be obvious & universal) are to me. By the end of the book, it becomes clear that the previous books in the series are some kind of John Carter style sword & planet SF, & that this entry is a departure in genre.
* Andrew Pickering’s The Cybernetic Brain is full of interesting technical & biographical detail I wasn’t aware of from a lifetime of being casually interested in cybernetics, & makes some interesting meta-philosophical points about cybernetics as a discipline being performance-oriented. He claims that the way that cyberneticians are interested in the performative aspects of processes as opposed to a focus on categorization & situat...