Post #3970268

@Viss@mastodon.social @kelseyhightower@mastodon.social I struggled to watch this even though it was smooooth. Delivery was top. The logic kept tripping me up. Audience members pulled on stage and laughed off kinda started it. One lacked knowledge, one had it. The laughs all landed the same way, like house rules, audience can't win. Nobody beats the speaker. That trick was the whole talk in miniature. "Kelsey version 45" is a self-signed certificate of being the accumulated version. The audience laughs made it seem like another signature. But real verification would require external detection of whether 45 is better than 44, instead of a regression. What if 25 is better than 45? The director with a "jar of Kafka sauce" also is mocked. That guy treated knowledge as inventory. And yet Kelsey 45 is all "read any new books?" Again, others lose, Kelsey wins. But why? Infer once, export, run without inference is catchy. Not as catchy as compilation with a caching layer. 1970s engineering, especially the repetition of Futamura philosophy, is cool retro stuff. But the idea about "tens of millions" in savings today needs people who can achieve 45 status, no? The snap census of who can create a database table from scratch had a lot of hands up, but the response was "You're all probably lying. I believe about two of you...". Ouch. I mean, isn't that the same logic for why we shouldn't believe Kelsey 45 is accumulated over 44? So the message I got is scarcity is a product. It's made rare by design for a consultant gig because that's higher pay to make fun of the audience and call them liars. I guess. I don't know, it's a lot of contradictions. And this is why I probably shouldn't do social media.