Aromatic selection is, of course, different from natural selection.
(Source: contextfreepatentart)
Everybody knows about the TVTropes-trap. Pixiv’s “people who bookmarked this also bookmarked” has a similar drown-you-in-tabs effect, and somehow I found myself drowning in tabs of gorgeous original fantasy-setting artwork.
Which is a great problem to have, really. These are both by 六七質. And have some direct links to spring and fall.
http://news.discovery.com/human/ancient-human-brain-neanderthal-120506.html
“When tested out in mice, researchers found this “error” caused the rodents’ brain cells to move into place faster and enabled more connections between brain cells.”
This sounds like the setup for Mrs. Frisby and the Rats of Nimh
Flying with Homemade electronics
It all sounds pretty straight-forward and “duh”, but good stuff to think about if you’re ever carrying prototype circuitboards or other “unfinished” electronics when flying.
Facebook is worried about the growth paradox, which goes something like this: The end result of successful hacking is product, and that product needs to grow by building more things. The more you grow, the more things you have, and the more you need people whose job is simply to coordinate the increasingly interdependent building activities. These people, called managers, don’t create product, they create process.
Hackers are allergic to process not because they don’t understand the value; they’re allergic to it because it violates their core values. These values are well documented in Zuckerberg’s letter: “Done is better than perfect”, “Code wins arguments”, and that “Hacker culture is extremely open and meritocratic”. The folks who create process care about control, and they use politics to shape that control and to influence communications, and if there is ever a sentence that would cause a hacker to stand up and throw his or her keyboard at the screen, it’s the first half of this one.
The growth paradox is that the chaotic means by which you found success might become distasteful to those you hire to maintain and build on that success. Once they’ve established themselves, they will point at the hacking and ask important sounding questions like, “What is it they are building?” or “How does this poorly defined thing fit into our overall strategy?” They will label these hackers “disruptors” and they are 100% correct.
Hacking is disruptive, and whether you code software, write books, or film movies, I believe bringing anything new into the world is a disruptive act. By being novel and compelling, the new is likely to replace something else and that something else isn’t being replaced without a fight.



