Love Julia Evans' stuff.

So much content out there disguises as 'tutorial' or 'blog post' but really is a part of the greater CV, evidence for skill and knowledge, and noticably fueled by fear of being technically wrong - the worst kind of wrong!

Mrs. Evans has this fearlessness to take on scary topics like profilers or "Ruby's Timeout", where it's hard to get a handle on all the nuances and to make a solid case. Without the need to prove anything, with no protective shield of aloofness the content turns out to be an enormous pleasure to read.

And maybe challenge the reader to produce content more honestly, too.

As a long time self learner (35 years), I really enjoyed the learning format (and learning focus!).

I was surprised how much I enjoyed clicking I learned something, even though I got the yes/no answer "correct".

Well done Julia. You have me thinking if I should prep my own content to direct new users to when fundamental questions are asked.

To me "learning" means understanding, not memorization on flashcards. Knowing stuff is part of it, but for me, the knowing comes from the understanding.

> people dislike questions that don’t match their mental model

> “what are the 4 parts of a HTTP request?”

I would describe this as a non-injective function. Unambiguous in one direction, but ambiguous in the other. It seems to be very common in lecturers who (1) have forgotten what it was like to learn it (2) aren't precise enough to ensure clarity as a matter of rigour.

Criticism aside, learning something is infinitely better than learning nothing. And finding a way to make it enjoyable and satisfying is a worthwhile end in itself.

When I can, I actually forbid my students from using flash cards. If they don't have the scaffolding to make a concept stick, time is better spent building the scaffolding (IMO).

What I love about the flashcards is how you're able to categorize "I learned something," "I knew that," "That's confusing."

An excellent way to know where you stand and learn.

From Socrates to Evans, using questions has been part of a long tradition. What are pre-Socratic examples?

(Why is this punctuation different from all other punctuation: ?)

If you read the Socratic dialogues, you'll get a sense of it. Sophists would typically teach just a series of "facts."

Feynman ran into something similar when he taught in Brazil. There's a difference between "knowing" the E=mc2, and "understanding" relatively. Sophists dealt in the former.