So, about one mushroom species in five is poisonous. Why is the ratio so low, why are there lots of edible ones? Without hard-shelled seeds to spread, why be eaten? And the poisonous ones apparently don't use color as a warning signal, and don't smell all that bad, and some of the poisons have really mild effects, like "gives only some people diarrhea" or "makes a hangover worse". Meanwhile three of the deadliest species seemed to need their toxin (amanitin) so much that they picked it up through horizontal gene transfer. Why did just those ones need to be deadly? In addition to which we have these species that don't even make you sick, just make you trip out, a function which looks to have evolved three times over in different ways. What kind of half-assed evolutionary strategies are these? What do mushrooms want?
I love seeing a change ringing article on HN, especially with well labelled diagrams!
The move to a framework system where we can all ring what we like and just describe it within an agreed upon nomenclature is a great improvement rather than the legacy Decisions. Having strict rules always seemed quite dated to me - the ringing police after all do not show up if you ring a "banned" performance. But agreeing on names makes communication possible - a good role for a central body.
Jump changes are fun too, but I don't think I agree with the article that allowing them has really led to a revolution. The top performances on BellBoard are of commonly rung non-jump methods. In fact I don't think I've seen a jump method be featured at all. Philip himself doesn't seemed to have published a performance of "Jump" anything since 2013. For many I think it remains an interesting novelty.
A tip about independent projects on a resume. Put yourself as an employee, a hired contractor, or just a technical co-founder. Don't mention that you're the solo or main founder, unless it's a far past project. I've learned the hard way that regardless of what they may say about looking for autonomous, free thinking, resourceful, self-starters, basically all the qualities of an entrepreneur, employers balk at the label. Some will reject a good profile if they don't feel that you'll be around for more than 2 years, even though many of their recent hires are gone shortly after a single year.
List what the technical challenges of the projects were, what its promoters expected, and how you addressed everything. Don't let entrepreneurial merits overshadow technical ones, especially if you're not after a position like product manager in a company that truly understands how to employ entrepreneurs.
Another way to think about it is that the perception that someone else took a risk on you seems more valuable to employers than you being crazy enough, audacious enough, or courageous enough to dare take on life.
