I'm a routine guy, so I'm biased, but I find myself agreeing with the values in this post, while feeling that a routing enables those values. For example,

> This is why I’m so positive on sending outbound emails to interesting people, hosting dinners and events that bring together smart folks...

I find that I'm much better at this kind of proactive outreach when I have routines that push me towards this.

The non-routine approach tends to break down when you need to collaborate IME (though many companies are successfully asynchronous).

It was Gary Bernhardt in this talk: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=sCZJblyT_XM

More Gary's talks:

https://www.destroyallsoftware.com/talks

Wow, this is a treasure trove. The thing that stands out to me is the idea that testing is the essential ingredient:

> The single most important factor leading to the high degree of reliability of the Apollo spacecraft was the tremendous depth and breadth of the test activity.

And the most valuable reason for testing:

> Most important of all, the tests gave us a tremendous amount of time and experience on the spacecraft and their systems.

Interesting idea. Just a note that the first answer I saw[0] is not correct.

This is given as how to write to a file in Javascript.

const {fs} = require('fs')

fs.writeFileSync('/tmp/myfile.txt', Buffer.from('hello'));

But you can't just do this in plain old JS. It needs to be Node running ES6+

[0]: https://howtoxwithy.com/how-to/b35668da-7cbe-456f-8db5-0d645...

That's true. Definitely need a way to distinguish between the two (browser vs. server) sometimes

Shameless plug: I'm also interested in assigning cost and prioritization to things when it's difficult to do so mathematically or trivially. I'm building a system to do so using Relative comparison. It's in the VERY early stages but: https://www.makepriorities.com

> This bug costs $20 each occurrence.

Knowing how much a bug costs is not always trivial.

I would argue that figuring out the real cost of a bug is not trivial most of the time.

> Guessing how long to fix, or how many "points" a bug will take is complete BS next to real-world values.

The difficulty is that "how long to fix" literally has to be a guess. Even with up front investment to investigate the nature of the bug and how to go about fixing it, the end result is still a guess, just a more educated guess.

Unless you're exceptionally good at predicting the future. We should have a sidebar chat if this applies to you.

I'm not sure client's time wasted is the right way to measure. For example, I would prioritize a high-risk security related bug (regardless of its effect on my systems performance) over a memory leak.

Right! And my point is that it's easier to measure present cost of $THING. And to compare to other so-measured things than it is to guess at time to fix. You can assign some cost to that security thing can't you? You can assign a risk and then assign cost to that risk.

I never stated that client time was the thing to measure. I'm saying (now repeating) that PRESENT COST is a better basis than FUTURE TIME GUESS.

The whole problem is management wants to maximize dev-time so they try to cram bugs to make your time full - based on a guess. It's ass backwards.

Measure the problem then budget resources to fix.

> These are big enough companies that they should be able to afford the time and resources to design easy-to-use UI that also allows the features power users are looking for

This is a really compelling sentiment. Do you have any companies you think do this well?

> Next up is disputing definitions, also known as an argument about semantics. Debates that reach this point can languish and falter because they immediately become about philosophical semantics, rather than the argument itself.

This is a good point that I find very difficult to follow. Often at work for example, I find myself in a debate over the next 'right' thing to do, but this is hard when there is not universal agreement on what is 'right'.

I think "Publish Often" is also an important part of OP's success. Had they not practiced making custom icons since 2013, they probably would not have been ready to capitalize on the one time they got buzz.

I don't.

I've hired people on fiverr and tapped development teams I've worked with before to deliver quickly.

"Had I not have already vetted that development team I wouldn't have been ready to capitalize so quickly. Had I not practiced making static websites. Had I not practiced tying SSL to domain names so that people take me seriously."

I'm not diminishing OP's skill, I am diminishing the message and pointing out which parts are repeatable. This is prosperity preaching (being rewarded for prior sacrifices because of those prior sacrifices) and wasting everyone's energy if they actually believe that and approach life this way. Unsubscribe to that logic and you still have execute quickly + make sure people know about it.

You're hitting the nail on the head but people can't bring themselves to accept you're right.

Yes the OP lovingly crafted his skills over a period of several years, but let's face it, his skills are commodities and you too could have achieved his success if you took a shortcut to hire someone to produce an icon pack quickly and professionally and then partnered with an influencer to sell the productized version of it.

Probably 94% of the success here is due to the influencer's exposure. The moral of the story is become good friends with influencers in relevant industries and be ready to act quickly on new business ideas, and keep access to cash to invest in whatever is needed.

I appreciate this view. The story our culture tells us of reward being proportional to sacrifice is well entrenched and of course a complete fantasy.

> This is prosperity preaching (being rewarded for prior sacrifices because of those prior sacrifices)

But don't those prior experiences grow your skill to a degree?

An influencer pushing your version of a product is a greater reason for prosperity than any merit of the product. That's the only point.

You are grasping at straws to support traf's view of the events.

Yes, doing something in the past helps you do something in the future. No, thats not the reason traf's work went viral.

That's not the only point. You are confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. Being able to do the thing that needs to be done at the right time is a a necessary condition for this success. It's definitely not sufficient condition as you rightly point out. You note that you use fiverr and development teams you've worked with before to deliver quickly. Without that you have nothing to deliver or it is beat in the market by the time you figure out how to make it. An influencer isn't going to magically create products for you.

Exactly. And without having made things, shared and built an audience, he would have been broadcasting into a void. Then there "influencer" would have never been part of the equation.

Is there some "luck" in that? Of course. But that bit of luck does not happen in a vacuum.

> "Publish Often" is also an important part of OP's success

100% this, I sell audio plugins and every time I release a new product there is a huge uptick in sales, and not just from existing users.

Where do you sell these audio plugins and for what daw

I don't have a full 'LeetCode' style example, but the Gilded Rose Kata teaches me something every time I try it.

Original Kata: https://iamnotmyself.com/2011/02/14/refactor-this-the-gilded... Sandi Metz's Take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bZh5LMaSmE