Even if you could express all tacit knowledge, which yoy can't because you may not know you hold it or it's hollistic, sharing it takes and resources.

And no projects have an infinite amount of those, so choices are made.

But they keep trying to take down the addons we use to protect us against them: ad blockers.

Honestly reports, accounting, personal journals and books shoukd be more interesting to historians than the cover of times mag.

Some of the greatest historians that cover Apple’s history are Walter Isaacson, KPMG, and EY.

> From today's perspective, it's boring, it's not insightful and the style is excruciatingly dated

From your perspective. From my perspective, Madame Bovary and Sentimental Education are exceptional. Fresh, engaging and psychologically insightful. I would recommend anyone who enjoys reading to try Flaubert.

What objective values are you judging it by?

You made a relative value judgement in your comment:

> At the time, given the lack of offer and the standards they had, sure, the books were great.

There is this effect, as with Shakespeare or the Bible, where you read a classic and it seems tacky and common because you read the same references a thousand times without realizing that originally it was the source of those references.

Maybe that has some influence in your opinion, or maybe you don't like Flaubert, and that is fine, just adding to the conversation. There are other tropes, like the tortured French intellectual (old professor usually) and womanizer character in a novel (cough Houellebecq) that I find tiring, but "para gustos colores" (different strokes for different folks).

IMO Long descriptions of rooms do not feel as modern as Hemingway, but who is to say that fashion won't change in the future.

Agreed "It's a classic so it's good, don't argue" doesn't wash. It's just conformity impressed on one by conformists. Some things need to be allowed to die on their own dis-merits, not forced to remain alive like tithonus (Vanity Fair, OMG)

(A bit more precisely, people should be allowed to make up their own mind. If I don't think Shakespeare is as good as I'm supposed to think he is, it's all subjective so my opinion carries as much weight as anyone else's. Nobody, especially at school, should be forced into reading what doesn't work for them. I'd much rather have read Greek legends myself).

Although your critique is reminiscent of some of the worst quotes from Sam Bankman Fried, I was intrigued, until you praised Pennac and Nothomb. Nothomb is a big bag of nothing. Pennac is nice and funny and is part of the readings I have been recommending to my kids, but he's not in the same league as Flaubert. In fact it's not even the same sport.

It's possible you disliked Flaubert because it was compulsory. Same thing happened to me with Stendhal. If so, may I suggest you try again.

What else is in your readings recommended to your kids?

I created an account just to refute this ridiculous comment. Flaubert genius was he was incredibly economical in his writing. Salambo, Temptation of St Anthony, Madame Bovary and Sentimental Education are all so wildly different. Event translated into English the fragrant, elegance comes through. Nabokov, James Joyce, William James and Cormac McCarthy all tooks lessons from him and recognized the power of his writing.

The papers of Cormac McCarthy have some self inspired French poetry inspired from 'The Temptation of St. Anthony'. Scenes from Blood Meridian are inspired by the violence of certain scenes in the Temptation.

He was a massively talented genius writer. I think you were forced to learn and appreciate literature and any work that is administered in an academic setting loses its charm.

Denigrating Greek literature is incredibly dismissive. Some of the passages of the Illiad (the description of the shield of Achilles or the scenes of Hectors fear of impending death). Or the Odyssey (the dog recognizing Odysseus) remain the some of the most evocative, tragic scenes of all liteature.

Literature reflects the age in which it is written. Simply declaring all social critique is useful between the 60s and 80s robs you of any undestanding of the past.

Madame Bovary is a savage social critique of insipid provincial life. You can feel the scorn and disdain dripping off the pages. Flaubert had opinions on his own characters and was without any empathy for them.

This entire comment is indicative of a tech bro who had a bad experience in public schooling.

Many of the classics are classics for a reason because time is the greatest sieve of quality or they are essential to understanding the Western cannon and by extension the entirety of Western thought.

> Denigrating Greek literature is incredibly dismissive

AFAICS he was praising it

Maybe you're just the wrong reader, or reading at the wrong time? I've noticed books get a lot worse or better depending on the age I read them, the conditions I'm in.

That said, I read (and liked) Flaubert in translation, so maybe it's worse in French.

I don't know enough about Flaubert, but Hugo??

Have you read some of its poetry? Have you read "The toad"?

If the death of Eponine in Les Misérables does not touch you then I understand why you dismiss all these writers, but you are the outlier here.

We have been exposed to a 1000 touching deaths. It was novel when it was written, and deep.

Today it's one more.

We don't seem to have the same taste, but you made me really curious by mentioning comics.

What are your recommendations for bandes dessinées that are stronger than Flaubert?

I like Daniel Pennac and Nothomb but come on, they didn't move forward the beauty of the french language.

I used to be relativistic in arts just like your comment, then I read Dumas (Monte Cristo) and Hugo (1793, The Workers of the Sea) and my jaw dropped. Must read ! (French here too)

That said, I'd love if music video clips, video games, TV shows took more inspiration from literature and merge more the different mediums

    But otherwise, we are stuck in the past, advising young readers to dive into things because of the inertia of their reputation rather than their real qualities

Agreed about inertia and conservatism, but still in France I notice we read lots of recent books too.

Lanzmann did, espacially with the white whale. I specifically chose those authors because they each bring something different.

Pennac brings a fresh point of view on morality, hapiness, character motivations, etc. Flaubert characters are monodimensional while pretending they are complex.

And nothomb has a different take on madness, absurd and finding life in it. Flaubert states what now we know is obvious, because we have read it ten times.

Flaubert tries to sell you something in the disguise of a story. I find it unsatisfying now that we have all those new flavors and textures in abundance.

We are drowning in talent and creativity, beauty and emotion. Our generation is blessed with so much good fresh cake I don't see the point of the dry one.

But to be honest, the only argument I need is that if you take a 100 kids and make them read all of them, 98 will not finish Flaubert if they have a choice, but they might finish one if the other books. That's not because Flaubert is too hard to get into.

Will look up Lanzmann thanks !

Nassim Taleb, in his incerto, makes the argument that:

- Most news is actually entertainment disguised as information.

- You can't act on the vast majority of news.

- Most medias, including specialized ones, can give a very good appearance of competence while actually knowing nothing of the actual situation.

- Medias, of course, have agendas and allegiances.

- You don't have neither the skill nor the resources to verify what they tell you. And dig a little once, you usually find out how alarmingly distorted the story is, suggesting you should do it thoroughly every single time.

- The volume of news, and noise vs signal ratio, is increasingly playing against you.

- It's fine to not have an opinion on most things. You opinion is worth zilch on most topics anyway and your decisions suck.

- It's exhausting and bad for your health and happiness.

He still reads some news, but consider it a way to entertain himself rather than being informed.

Tim Ferris has a similar view, and get most of its news from conversation with others, assuming that if they are in the mind of people, the filter of consequences on his life has already been applied.

n = 1, but I've seen my father has been watching an analyzing the news every single day for all my life. Thousands of hours of consumption, reactions, debates, bad moods and judgement.

I never saw him ONCE make a daily decision based on the news that made his life better.

Personally, I've found most medias content to be very low quality, and the propaganda everywhere. The time and energy it takes to untangle all that is not worth it.

I find way more interesting the reports of individuals with skin in the game. That's one of the reason I'm on HN.

And still, I know that even HN is most of the time, entertainment for me.

I think the biggest point here is that the news will very rarely help you make better decisions in your own life.

And that's true. Following the wars in Ukraine or Israel/Gaza isn't going to change anything about my life for the better, even if I feel bad saying out loud that maybe I just shouldn't read about it -- that makes it sound like I don't care. Reading about the antics of Trump or Biden or Schumer or Johnson or Jeffries or McConnell isn't going to change what I do day by day, at least not for the better. Getting angry at Ken Paxton or the Texas Supreme Court for their utter disregard for human life brings me down, not up, and there's nothing I can do about that situation anyway.

An argument I can think of for keeping informed about that sort of thing is that it's one of the factors I might put into the next time election day comes up. If a particular candidate had a good response or bad response to these things, it might help me decide who to vote for. But the thing is, I don't need to follow these events in real time to get that help. I can wait until a month or two before the election, and start reading things, nicely summarized, about the candidates' positions, reactions, voting record, etc. on these topics. And I'll spend a lot less time doing it, too.

(Let's ignore for a minute whether or not voting is a productive activity; I'm going to vote because I feel like I have a responsibility to do so, regardless of its efficacy.)

And here I'm just talking about political news. There's so much other news, and I can't see how much of that could be any more useful to my day-to-day.

Tim Ferris' idea about filter of consequences is interesting. Except for the fact that that information has likely passed through filters of propaganda and almost certainly passed through filters of ignorance, stupidity, and bias. No matter how well-informed, intelligent, and unbiased you think the deliverer of said information might be unless he's telling you something he witnessed first hand.

For now LLM can only answer, but they will soon be able to prompt YOU.

True conversation is going to be very interesting.

I still think callable, and iter should be usable this way.

any(), probably not. The semantic is too different.

But having to import Callable while callable is a built-in is a missed opportunity.

I don't miss Union, Optional and List.

From a french perspective, that seems like tuesday.

Peter attia adresses that in outlive: bias survivor.

People with good longevity genetic don't pay the price as much for their behavior, so they indulge in it and stand out.

But most people don't have that, and can only emulate a little their epigenetic by exercice, diet, etc.

There a tribe in Ecuador with reduced height studied by Walter Longo etc. They have a mutation in their growth hormone receptor, that means that they experience less effect of human growth hormone, hence reduced height. And their lifestyle is rather unhealthy: alcohol, smoking, sugars, junk food, obesity etc. Yet they rarely experience diabetes, cancer etc probably due to reduced mTOR pathway activation.

In the context of this specific post regarding Charlie Munger, you can't say that it's genetics unless you measure specific genes. He could be 100x Bryan Johnson, but Bryan Johnson at least makes his protocols open for use. And Munger didn't even bother to make a genetics test with his curiosity, thus providing no essential value to human civilization.