"Simple Made Easy" - Rich Hickey (2011)

What people said

yooogurt · 2025-12 · Strong recommendation

If you haven't heard of Rich Hickey, then you're fortunate to have the opportunity to watch "Simple Made Easy" for the first time: [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗

funcDropShadow · 2023-11 · Strong recommendation

This doesn't sound like a simple solution from your fellow devs. It appears to have been an easy solution. If the distinction isn't familiar to you, there is a great talk of Rich Hickey [0], that explains that distinction and some more. The talk is definitely not only applicable to Clojure. YAGNI is a great slogan, but must not be a dogma. If you already know, that you are going to need custom rules. Then prepare for it. But, if --- for example --- the current rules are almost trivial, and you don't know yet, which rule engine will be the right fit later on. Then it might be a good idea to postpone the decision about the rule engine, until you know more. In the meantime a hard-coded solution could be enough. [0]: [VIDEO]

Read the original HN comment ↗

xiphias2 · 2023-02 · Strong recommendation

Actually Rick Hickey's talk ( [VIDEO] ) is amazing because he talks about your case by going back to the original meaining of words: ,,Complex comes from the Latin complecti, which means “to entwine around, to embrace'' Simplicity requires layering, so in your examples the main requirement for simplicity is about how intertwined your hobby project is with the transciever code or ethernet code. As long as the abstraction layer works well for you without getting too much into the details of the implementation, it's a simple solution. Of course it's not a clear answer whether you should do things yourself or use a third-party, but if the third-party works perfectly for use case without significant tradeoff in your system, of course it's better to use it.

Read the original HN comment ↗