Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Richard Feynman didn’t use poor analogies.


Chuck Norris doesn't even NEED analogies. He explains the original problem so hard that you understand it without reference to a similar but more familiar situation.

Chuck Norris would probably have mentioned "dev" and "production" and never needed to discuss furniture used for stacking open-faced envelopes for holding papers.


Chuck Norris doesn’t use AI, AI uses Chuck Norris.


'Poor' is subjective. Some might even use it to describe your comment.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: