Are We There Yet - Rich Hickey
Zhang Jian4 HN recommenders · 2021–2026
24K views · talk · evergreen · Uploaded 2019-07-29
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.
53:22Ruby Conf 12 - Y Not- Adventures in Functional Programming by Jim Weirich
Confreaks
38:47RailsConf 2014 - All the Little Things by Sandi Metz
Confreaks
42:03The Soul of Erlang and Elixir • Sasa Juric • GOTO 2019
GOTO Conferences
1:01:39"Simple Made Easy" - Rich Hickey (2011)
Strange Loop Conference
25:06"Making Impossible States Impossible" by Richard Feldman
elm-conf
![Video frame: William Byrd on "The Most Beautiful Program Ever Written" [PWL NYC]](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/OyfBQmvr2Hc/hq2.jpg)
1:31:06William Byrd on "The Most Beautiful Program Ever Written" [PWL NYC]
PapersWeLove
1:00:19How To Design A Good API and Why it Matters
Google TechTalks
31:44The Value of Values with Rich Hickey
InfoQ
6 comments from Hacker News
I personally started with this talk by Rich Hickey (person who made Clojure) [VIDEO] One of the best "why Clojure" talks that I've seen, especially for somebody coming from an OOP perspective, like myself.
>> 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 [VIDEO]
If you're going to reference a Rich Hickey take-down of OOP, I think "Are We There Yet?" is the most pertinent: [VIDEO] Of course, Simple Made Easy is excellent too, probably his most influential talk.
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] - [VIDEO]
Rich Hickey made a great talk on this in 2009 [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.
Rich Hickey's: Are We There Yet may be interesting to any one here: [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.