4 ms·

It's also really interesting to note how many "tech people" are vocal about all sorts of things outside of their expertise. You will find 'techies' experts on e

It's also really interesting to note how many "tech people" are vocal about all sorts of things outside of their expertise. You will find 'techies' experts on everything, it seems. I'm still not sure if this behavioral anomaly is there in the first place or is it due to the nature of prevalent media that carries those voices.

tomc1985 10y ago
I think it's arrogance. Programming has this weird allure where you think you understand the rest of the world.
- kristopolous 10y ago
  I had an epiphany about 7 years ago that computers are only collective human effort. Everything you touch is an idea, thought, and implementation by some person. Programming ought to be a rich dive into cultural consciousness, like a sociologist living with some remote tribe. Instead, we get caught up in the fetishization and marvel of the machine itself; as if it all has descended from God and is part of nature. This is a detriment against seeing our part in the flow of the giant anarchistic relay race that is technology; when we dip our feet into this moving river we are part of the river as much as a twig or a rock - disrupting and modifying the flow; placing it in new directions. But only if we empower ourselves. Technology is anywhere from a culminate expression of culture to its artifact.
  - ktRolster 10y ago
    I voted you up because, although I'm not entirely sure I agree with you, it was very eloquently said.
    - kristopolous 10y ago
      Where else does software and hardware come from? The neighbor's clever dog? Some innovative robot? It's an expression of human culture. That's why the trendiest and not the most talented people are the most successful and why we currently and have always lived in an era of very fashionable fad software that isn't very good. It quickly gets superseded like fashion on a runway because that's what it is.
      - ktRolster 10y ago
        The first paragraph is great. It's the next three that really get interesting.
freshhawk 10y ago
Oh hell yes, that is often infuriating and sometimes dangerous. I figure a few factors must be: Often being surrounded by people with simpler jobs than yours so you understand theirs but they can't understand yours. Even if the job requires more skill and is harder to do than the tech job, it seems easier in the same way that outsiders presume that the hard part of programming is learning those funny looking programming languages and cryptic terminal commands. You get used to explaining things to people who don't get it. IQ is likely more useful in tech as well so the tech people tend to be smarter in that way than their other peers. They also value IQ more highly than other forms of intelligence because that's the one they probably have. There are a lot of jobs in tech where social interaction isn't as important, so the field self selects for this. People who value and/or are skilled in these traits will leave or be tempted away at a higher rate than the replacement rate. These skills correlate with effective introspection and self evaluation. Systems thinking is a learned skill, and it does actually make you better at understanding things in general. It's not evenly distributed and those without this skill can seem less intelligent than they are. This aspect is less hubris than actually having been trained in a useful general thinking tool by your job. Western culture recently funnelled a lot of low status kids into tech. The narrative was that they were "the smart ones", they have carried over this "we're the smart ones, not like those stupid jocks and douchebags" framework into adulthood and are still trapped by it. Anti-intellectualism provided the seed for this narrative but it is way overblown. The valley pushes this "you're the special best, you deserve to rule, save the world, fix everything the stupids ruined" narrative pretty hard because it works well. This combines into: Privileged, sheltered humans with a chip on their shoulder, local evidence of superiority in an area they both value and a lowered ability to understand or even recognize other areas. That strikes me as a recipe for this, physicists do it too as do economists and trust fund kids with an MBA. Doctors are famous for similar personality defects.

tomc1985 10y ago

I think it's arrogance. Programming has this weird allure where you think you understand the rest of the world.

kristopolous 10y ago
I had an epiphany about 7 years ago that computers are only collective human effort. Everything you touch is an idea, thought, and implementation by some person. Programming ought to be a rich dive into cultural consciousness, like a sociologist living with some remote tribe. Instead, we get caught up in the fetishization and marvel of the machine itself; as if it all has descended from God and is part of nature. This is a detriment against seeing our part in the flow of the giant anarchistic relay race that is technology; when we dip our feet into this moving river we are part of the river as much as a twig or a rock - disrupting and modifying the flow; placing it in new directions. But only if we empower ourselves. Technology is anywhere from a culminate expression of culture to its artifact.
- ktRolster 10y ago
  I voted you up because, although I'm not entirely sure I agree with you, it was very eloquently said.
  - kristopolous 10y ago
    Where else does software and hardware come from? The neighbor's clever dog? Some innovative robot? It's an expression of human culture. That's why the trendiest and not the most talented people are the most successful and why we currently and have always lived in an era of very fashionable fad software that isn't very good. It quickly gets superseded like fashion on a runway because that's what it is.
    - ktRolster 10y ago
      The first paragraph is great. It's the next three that really get interesting.

freshhawk 10y ago

Oh hell yes, that is often infuriating and sometimes dangerous. I figure a few factors must be: Often being surrounded by people with simpler jobs than yours so you understand theirs but they can't understand yours. Even if the job requires more skill and is harder to do than the tech job, it seems easier in the same way that outsiders presume that the hard part of programming is learning those funny looking programming languages and cryptic terminal commands. You get used to explaining things to people who don't get it. IQ is likely more useful in tech as well so the tech people tend to be smarter in that way than their other peers. They also value IQ more highly than other forms of intelligence because that's the one they probably have. There are a lot of jobs in tech where social interaction isn't as important, so the field self selects for this. People who value and/or are skilled in these traits will leave or be tempted away at a higher rate than the replacement rate. These skills correlate with effective introspection and self evaluation. Systems thinking is a learned skill, and it does actually make you better at understanding things in general. It's not evenly distributed and those without this skill can seem less intelligent than they are. This aspect is less hubris than actually having been trained in a useful general thinking tool by your job. Western culture recently funnelled a lot of low status kids into tech. The narrative was that they were "the smart ones", they have carried over this "we're the smart ones, not like those stupid jocks and douchebags" framework into adulthood and are still trapped by it. Anti-intellectualism provided the seed for this narrative but it is way overblown. The valley pushes this "you're the special best, you deserve to rule, save the world, fix everything the stupids ruined" narrative pretty hard because it works well. This combines into: Privileged, sheltered humans with a chip on their shoulder, local evidence of superiority in an area they both value and a lowered ability to understand or even recognize other areas. That strikes me as a recipe for this, physicists do it too as do economists and trust fund kids with an MBA. Doctors are famous for similar personality defects.