Are We There Yet - Rich Hickey on HackerTube: recommended by 4 Hacker News commenters across 5 separate months, 2021–2026.
talk · intermediate · evergreen
Rich Hickey's talk on time, state, identity and values, arguing that mutable object-oriented modeling fits the world poorly. It lays out the thinking behind Clojure's approach to data and change.
Recommended as one of the best explanations of why Clojure and a functional, immutable approach to state exist.
“One of the best "why Clojure" talks that I've seen”
6 Hacker News comments link this video. Each one links back to its thread.
I personally started with this talk by Rich Hickey (person who made Clojure) ▶ this video One of the best "why Clojure" talks that I've seen, especially for somebody coming from an OOP perspective, like myself.
in “Tour of our 250k line Clojure codebase” · View on HN
Rich Hickey's: Are We There Yet may be interesting to any one here: ▶ this video I found this to be one of the more interesting talks I've watched. Like you (I think) - I love functional languages. But there's a problem I can't really figure out how to articulate where they reach a level where they stop "just working" imo. Maybe it's just me being too dumb.
in “My thoughts after using Clojure for about a month” · View on HN
Rich Hickey made a great talk on this in 2009 ▶ this video An other way to think about it is that the programs we write do not literally simulate entities (users, other domain objects like books, students, professors, classes, etc). Our software simulates the record keeping devices that store /protect information regarding these entities. We are most of the time writing information processing systems, not simulation systems and information accumulates, rather than updates in places. Like, e.g. when there's a new president elected, we don't all go out with our erasers and remove all references to change sentences from "The President is Donald Trump" to say "The President is Joe Biden", instead we accumulate new facts without remembering the old.
in “Two Vexing Problems in Functional Programming” · View on HN
If you're going to reference a Rich Hickey take-down of OOP, I think "Are We There Yet?" is the most pertinent: ▶ this video Of course, Simple Made Easy is excellent too, probably his most influential talk.
in “Case against OOP is understated, not overstated (2020)” · View on HN
>> I am surprised that there are still no software development platforms where you use one language for all levels and do not have to translate between different ways of representing data and interacting with services. You've spotted a problem that I think many people are blind to. I agree 100%. If you'd like to explore more about Clojure, I highly recommend this talk ▶ this video
in “Ask HN: New Programming Language?” · View on HN
Late to the party here, but what you propose is not being cheeky. Rich Hickey (Clojure creator) himself has a similar, interesting, and compelling take on time and mutability [0]. This perspective is the underlying basis of Datomic. [0] - ▶ this video
in “Two Vexing Problems in Functional Programming” · View on HN