"Knowing names is my job. My art. To weave the magic of a thing, you see, one must find its true name out. In my lands we keep our true names hidden all our lives long, from all but those whom we trust utterly; for there is great power, and great peril, in a nam- what's that? Yes, I did move the Issue into the Backlog before starting the Sprint. No, it was seven Story Points. Break it down into two Subtasks? Yeah, can do. Then I'll mark it as Ready." -- Ursula K. Le Guin (mostly)

Having never seriously looked into 3D printing and knowing essentially nothing about firearms, a few mostly-unserious questions come to mind:

1. Is there any value in 3D printing the inverse of the shapes one would need to use as a mold?

2. How many subdivisions of gun-shaped part I wonder are needed before the ultimate intended shape is obscured without impacting the functionality

3. Given 2, is there even any value in 1.

> slice the problem

Pun intended

A related comment to mention the perceived good performance of the website and how the web would be much better if such simple and performant designs were more prevalent.

A second paragraph vaguely taking aim at every common framework and library used and why they're all the real fundamental problem.

A mildly annoyed reply quoting the Hacker News Guidelines to point out that:

> On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes more than hacking and startups.

Is pettifogging some kind of etymological parent of bikeshedding then?

They're etymologically unrelated, "bikeshedding" having been coined in our field and our lifetime, but semantically not too far apart. The main difference I see is that pettifogging connotes an ulterior motive which the described activity serves to conceal, while bikeshedding explicitly denotes the service of no purpose save the burnishment of the bikeshedder's ego.

(The term "bikeshedding" is insufficiently defined, in that it implicitly excludes the social reasons always underlying human behavior, which is why I these days prefer the word I used. Honestly, having been away from it now something over a year, even the simple jargon of the field begins to take on a queasy pseudocolor in my mind, the stinking sinus-stinging yellow-green of a revolted gut revolting. Thinking back over the rattle of acronyms and half-words that used to shape my days comes to be like thinking back over times I have been feverishly ill. Perhaps for once in my life I am on the leading edge of something.)

I know a few people that simply wear headphones to help with managing sensory overload, so I wouldn't assume that having headphones on is a guarantee of listening to something (though still likely to be strongly correlated).

As far as assailants, a skilled ninja wouldn't be detected even if their target weren't wearing headphones...

I'll have you know my mediocrity is directly proportional to my age.

I've reverted to the mean more times than I can count!

Probably sigmoids

> Ctrl-F "help"

> Ctrl-F "h"

> 0 results found

Interesting set of shortcuts and slash commands.

Is that three kinds of regular meetings? Because I count 8 meetings (and four kinds, as I don't think I've ever had demo and retro combined due to different groups of people being in both).

Sure, I was being loose with my terminology, you are right to correct this.

the point was in a 40 hour work week, it's reasonable for 15% of it to spent in coordination meetings, while 85% is directly related to progress.

Usually the retro is after the demo when other folks leave the room / drop from the zoom :-)

Not correcting, just clarifying for myself. I sure wish I had such a controlled environment with only 15% of time in coordination and where standup actually was 15 mins and not a segue into the everything meeting.