What do you mean when you say: slow down time

I represented my state in U14/U17 age groups table tennis tournaments & soon learnt that while competing in sports is seen as something noble, it barely makes money even for the most talented folks out there The TLDR is sports doesn't make money. The best people can do is get a government job. Ok try to see it this way: everybody I played with who didn't pursue proper engineering or similar paths is not even in a government job. They're likely just teaching a sport in some of these societies and you can say that maybe that is what they like doing for a living. I think they were as smart and driven as I was and I just got lucky that I got into tech or I got into fields which are more prosperous. This is the point here: similar people, similar background, extremely different outcomes. You could say some of it is just a single variable called "what prosperous field did you pursue?" I am completing 16 years in the field and let's say I did a graduation of 4 years so it's 20 years from being a teenager. As a teenager all of us were from similar backgrounds. All of us were similarly smart in IQ and hard work. I would argue some of them were more hardworking than I was, more disciplined, and some of them were genuinely very capable of a level of devotion which can put a lot of good craftsmen in our industry to shame. They were so capable of controlling their impulse. They were so capable of putting in long hours. They were so capable of persisting for months over a single pursuit. It's unreal how competition shaped us. It helped us become better. It helped us believe that a goal is worth months or years of constant pursuit. That growth is real. That what seems magical today is just a lot of hours put into the craft. Those are very beautiful traits to learn and they had those traits and they leveraged them and learned that pattern of deliberate practise of seeing the exponential curve of learning, reaching a point where it feels like magic. They saw it day in and day out. Yet when you look at business and money most of them didn't make it so well. I always wondered what if they had taken a different path? In my case my parents, despite their other failures as a parent, definitely did push me in the right direction by not allowing me to continue playing sports and instead shut it down when I became a teenager and pushed me to study and prepare for entrance exams. I hated them for it initially but life has shown me that it was an infinitely better decision than letting me continue in sports. I am very lucky that they did not risk my career that way. Another interesting piece here is that a lot of players who even reached higher levels than mine, maybe became India's top 10, actually would have had injuries that pushed them back by decades. There was the risk of a single physical injury ending the game for you. In India apart from cricket almost all other games have very little audience and fame and money that comes with it. At least that was the case till 2000. I think now that is changing and that is good that we are diversifying into n number of sports. The essence is that sports is a great entertaining event and that is where a lot of people confuse it with some noble pursuit. It is not a noble pursuit. It is a pursuit of a good show that viewers will pay for in some way: the thrill of it, the excitement of it, the joy of watching people compete. Why it feels unfair is that most people who devote themselves to sports are generally very smart and, more importantly, very disciplined. You cannot achieve a certain level of outcome without a certain level of practise and discipline. That is kind of what makes you strong and fit for a lot of good corporate jobs but it also comes at a cost. In terms of zero-sum games, the competitive nature of sports often leads to people harbouring a deep scarcity mindset because there are very few winners. Now that is helpful for some business positions but for some it just becomes a liability, especially if you are in a creative field like tech, where it's not about winning. It's about creating something cool or differentiated while believing that many cool things can simultaneously exist. So I am arguing that if you find good sportsmen and can train them for a particular, say, craft, they can be good employees. The downside though is that a lot of people come to sports because they didn't want to study. They didn't want to put in the hard work but that again depends on the context. Some of them, if they would have been given the chance to study, would have done pretty well but they just weren't from such families or such places.

@elonmusk Why not Rust ? PMHARRY Pradhan Mantri Har Application Rust Rewrite Yojna

This right here what I have is enough ...

The intuition around Rust, Generics & zero cost abstractions

Hypothesis: Running multiple agents is for people who are alreay well verse with the codebase, for the rest of us it is a way to distract ourselves from high leverage tasks

This is what the set up looks like, I actually try to sit in deep squat most of the time except when I am in meetings

As @dejavucoder says the chai must go on ...

Systems programming can't have a lot of boilerplate hence shipping fast reliably is difficult

Why it was intuitive for me to take a sabbatical for Rust OSS

The chai must go on ...

The difference between the two CVs is that first one is driven by the past. The reason FDE feels like a good fit for me and almost everybody advises me to embrace FDE that because I am a PM, I will find it easier to be an FDE. But probably FDE is a fad again, the way we had some of the other fads coming in. It is not the highest leverage point, not for someone like me. It is not the best use of my time. It is too broad. It is not deep enough. Honestly, if you are working as a full stack dev, you will have to embrace the business problem. You will have to talk to customers. If you are not doing that, you are not being a good engineer. This new terminology is more like, "Hey, let's package PMs or anybody who is not technical enough to do some tasks which are in a middle layer where they do not have to be deep enough and so on." It took me some time to realize that, FDE is not what I want to do. I do not want to be an FDE. I aimed for being a system programmer, and that is what I am going to be. It is not the best use of my time. And that is why the second CV is a little more assertive and straightforward. It is not trying to create a narrative of what happened in your life. It is basically saying, "Hey, yes, this is what I want to do, and this is what I will make efforts towards to build my reputation, and that is it."

Hypothesis: Do not get addicted to videos and get good sleep, you will already be differentiated enough to make good money

Hypothesis: Only 1% PMs are useful

expectation about the fruits of karma is the source of your suffering the objective function ruins you happiness

Anytime I see a design choice being made in a product or a language - I ask the LLM why this might have been done - often v helpful why iggy messages have a particular format of separate index x log files - and why they have 64 bytes in the header

pov you are waiting for the next round

Caveat: Not an investment advice