4 ms·

And this is exactly why "smart" people are counterproductive. Their "smart" solutions are not reproducible.

• bbcbasic 10y ago
  A smart person who is also pragmatic and takes the team into account though is superproductive. Their solutions may take a bit of learning but it pays off.
  • sklogic 10y ago
    > Their solutions may take a bit of learning but it pays off. Solution that takes a bit of learning is always worse than a solution that does not need any learning and is obvious to anyone, even to someone in my IQ range.
    • bbcbasic 10y ago
      Not always. Otherwise we'd all be using punchcards and valves still.
      • sklogic 10y ago
        I used punchcards. It definitely required more learning than a video terminal.
• deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
• Retra 10y ago
  That's in running for the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
  • sklogic 10y ago
    Try to look at a smart-ass solution and compare it to a good, solid, dumb solution. The former is A->"some-obscure-magic"->D, while the latter would be like "A->B->C->D" with each step explained in an ELI5 style. No matter what, I'd always prefer the second option.
    • girvo 10y ago
      Are you a python programmer? :) My coworker is, and he bangs the same drum. I agree with him on it, mostly!
      • sklogic 10y ago
        Actually, no. I believe Python is exactly the opposite thing, despite preaching some of the right ideas. Python is too low level, and therefore it invites obscure solutions that hides the real meaning behind layers upon layers of low level, irrelevant details. Exactly a tool for the "smart" people, pretty much useless for a reproducible and maintainable development.
        • girvo 10y ago
          > therefore it invites obscure solutions that hides the real meaning behind layers upon layers of low level, irrelevant details And thats exactly why I said "mostly agree" with my coworker! This is my exact gripe. Basically its the same idea, taken to an extreme to the point where it no longer matches the original reason.
          • sklogic 10y ago
            There is nothing wrong with the idea per se. It's just implemented badly in Python. Instead of allowing unlimited abstraction, which is the only way to unlock this desired simplicity on all possible levels, they're limiting the abstraction and therefore increasing the complexity needlessly.
    • Retra 10y ago
      You're not talking about smart people, you're talking about "smart" people, who are clearly not that smart if they're doing such obviously stupid things.
      • sklogic 10y ago
        I'm talking about the people with high IQ. Most of them are guilty of the same "from A straight to Z" mistake, unfortunately.