17 ms·

Knuth is such a class act. I don't think I've ever heard a negative story about him. Contrast him to, say, the harsh laguage Linus Torvalds routinely engages in

Knuth is such a class act. I don't think I've ever heard a negative story about him. Contrast him to, say, the harsh laguage Linus Torvalds routinely engages in or the many stories pointing out Steve Jobs' unfriendly side. I'm not 100% sure if you have to be a jerk to get ahead in life and lean towards 'yes' on this but when I see guys like Knuth, I wonder if nice guys do win sometimes. >TXT2COM As an 80s BBS kid, I thank you for this. I'm sure I used this many times over and never considered the author. I think this was commonly used to package text files for download back in the day.

willhslade 10y ago
Knuth is a one man shop. Torvalds is leading the biggest open source project in the world, and Jobs was leading one of America's largest corporations by market cap. Leading is different than writing.
- cesarbs 10y ago
  Being a leader does not justify being an asshole.
  - pjc50 10y ago
    These days, it seems to be a requirement for getting elected.
  - dpark 10y ago
    Nowhere did willhslade say that it does. He said that comparing Knuth's style to Torvalds's isn't very enlightening because they are fundamentally engaged in different activities. Comparing Knuth to Torvalds and saying "look, you don't have to be an asshole to be a great leader" is like comparing Usain Bolt to Dean Karnazes and saying "look, you don't have to be really muscular to be a great sprinter." The comparison is pointless because Karnazes isn't a sprinter just like Knuth isn't leading major software efforts. Find a successful leader of a large-scale piece of software who doesn't have a reputation for being an asshole and use them for the comparison.
    - pmelendez 10y ago
      >The comparison is pointless because Karnazes isn't a sprinter just like Knuth isn't leading major software efforts. That makes sense, except that OP said "You don't have to be a jerk to get ahead in life", he didn't mentioned being a leader. The followed commenters brought the leadership point into attention and then subtly implied that there is more correlation between being a jerk and a leader.
      - dpark 10y ago
        I was replying to cesarbs, who literally said "Being a leader does not justify being an asshole." Edit: And yes, the conversation pivoted to being a leader because that is a critical difference between Knuth and Torvalds which seems very relevant to this sort of comparison.
    - sedachv 10y ago
      > Find a successful leader of a large-scale piece of software who doesn't have a reputation for being an asshole and use them for the comparison. So pretty much everyone except for Torvalds and de Raadt? Those guys are the exception and not the rule.
      - merb 10y ago
        define large-scale? used in large-scale or has a large-scale developer base? for used in large-scale I know some, but they don't have a large-scale developer base.
      - scrollaway 10y ago
        Bezos, Ellison. I agree, still the exception, but I feel like it's extremely unfair to say "everyone except" and forget the devil himself :)
        sedachv 10y ago
        From what I have read Bezos always had a minimal role in the technical management of Amazon other than yelling at people to work harder and micro-managing how amazon.com looked. I have not read anything about Ellison but cannot imagine he has been involved in managing Oracle the database vs Oracle the corporation since the late 1980s.
  - wyager 10y ago
    It's a survival mechanism. Not everyone has the time or ability to be nice to everyone they have to deal with in a position like Torvalds'.
    - sedachv 10y ago
      > It's a survival mechanism. Not everyone has the time or ability to be nice to everyone they have to deal with in a position like Torvalds'. Flaming someone on a mailing list takes as much time as being nice to them. If it was about time then Linus could just ignore or dismiss things without going out of his way to type up insults.
      - wyager 10y ago
        > Flaming someone on a mailing list takes as much time as being nice to them. Not if you take into account the time saved by (strongly) discouraging people from wasting your time in the future. > If it was about time then Linus could just ignore or dismiss things No, you absolutely cannot do that. If you ignore people on software projects, they do not go away. They just get more convinced that they're right, which means getting more shrill and insistent.
  - kislotnik 10y ago
    You don't tolerate them but want them to tolerate others. TBH, I'd be totally fine if Linus ranted over my code because that's the way he is and I don't believe in community that tries to isolate an individual because he/she doesn't have a popular mindset. Edit: typical -> popular
    - kevinh 10y ago
      That goes both ways, though, right? There are people who are isolated in the community because of the actions of hyper-critical people. The presence of people like Torvalds is isolating to others. I mean, sure, you may think that Torvalds provides more value than the people he isolates, but either way people are getting isolated.
      - kislotnik 10y ago
        Thanks, I got your point, and I don't value Torvalds over other people, but I value his kernel engineering skills over other people's kernel engineering skills. You know, if it has to be our decision whom to isolate, why not create a competitive community and vote for it with commits, instead of destroying the original community by removing Linus out of the office?
    - dbaupp 10y ago
      The whole "you're tolerant so you have to tolerate intolerance!!1!" thing is not some clever loophole, it's just a weak attempt to justify why people shouldn't be called out for being unpleasant/bigoted. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tolerance#Paradox_of_tolerance http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tolerance#Paradox_of_tolerance
      - Natsu 10y ago
        The "intolerance" Popper talked of preventing was this: "In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols." Cite: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/25998-the-so-called-paradox-of-freedom-is-the-argument-that-freedom http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/25998-the-so-called-paradox-... So his justification for this was founded on a prevention of violence. We already have this in the USA, for example, in that we forbid incitement to violence, fighting words and the like. So unless you can show some strong nexus between these statements and actual, physical violence of some kind, you can't use Karl Popper as a justification.
  - jmcdiesel 10y ago
    Jobs wasn't an asshole. People confuse directness with being an asshole. If your results suck, saying they suck isn't being an asshole. If you feel that something is horrible, sugar-coating it to make sure you don't hurt someone's feelings is unauthentic. Here's the difference... When someone says "your product sucks, throw it away" .. with the INTENT of causing that person to feel bad, thats being an ashhole. If you tell them that their product sucks because you genuinely feel that way, and you're simply communicating authentically, then you're not being an asshole, you're being authentic. Here's how you can tell the difference. The former in that example get stuck at best in middle management in low-quality companies... the latter finds themselves at the top.
    - Frondo 10y ago
      Guess what: being an asshole is in the eye of the beholder. If someone says I'm an asshole, I don't get to tell them they're wrong. It's how they feel about me, regardless of whatever I or anyone else feels. The absolute best I could do is say that they're alone in feeling that way. Lots of folks thought Steve Jobs was an asshole. You can say "well he was just direct" but that doesn't take away how they felt about him, or what their opinions are.
    - digler999 10y ago
      > Jobs wasn't an asshole. so the stories about him firing people on a whim weren't true ?
      - drzaiusapelord 10y ago
        Or that famous email telling everyone not to poach "his" employees. As if he has ownership over then like a feudal lord over serfs. Oh and that email ends with not very veiled patent lawsuit threat for anyone who disagrees? And you guys complain about your wages and working hours? Maybe don't deify the guy who worked against you and your interests his whole career.
  - hurbledr 10y ago
    It can certainly justify being short with people though.
- drzaiusapelord 10y ago
  Oh, there's definitely a hermit vs ceo aspect here, but I really doubt it justifies being an anger prone leader with no filter. There are many leaders who aren't like this yet somehow they do okay and on the flipside many academics who are one-man shops who are massive jerks. I suspect tech draws in certain personality types (DIY types, aspies, loners, etc) who really never developed the social skills needed, didn't really do much teamwork when younger as tech is often a hermit's game, and fell into a position of authority and went with the default of bullying, which clearly gets results, but doesn't make for the best work environment. I find myself dealing with the same struggles at work. I can't believe how slow/stupid/careless so many of my co-workers are, but snapping at them is ultimately counter-productive and more than likely bad for my career. Frankly, I don't considering myself a good team player and I lean towards the hermit approach often. If I was the boss, who knows, I'd probably be a terror.
mmmpop 10y ago
Wow soapbox much? We get it, Linus is a big meanie.
ldfdr 10y ago
You're confusing being a jerk with communication styles and cultural differences. You'd never hire anyone from the American inner city, from parts of Scotland and Ireland, parts of New York, and similar. Some very nice people talk loudly, swear, and use politically incorrect language. This is part of the reason some URMs can't get ahead in US corporate culture. Yes, Linus does swear a lot, and uses aggressive language. That's part of his style, his culture, and how he communicates. No, he is not a jerk. The reason Linux beat the BSDs is because Linus is a very nice guy. He created a community which, despite the harsh language, was very welcoming, and willing to mentor new people. The BSDs created elitist, closed-off communities, which were unwelcoming to newcomers. If you made a mistake, the BSD communities would write you off. The Linux community would tell you what you did wrong, and how to fix it, even if they used harsh language to do so. The Linux culture is also quite meritocratic. It doesn't matter how you communicate, or how incompetent you were a year ago. If you're doing good technical work today, you're welcome. More than other cultures, arguments are taken at technical face value, not by who makes them.
- pmelendez 10y ago
  >No, he is not a jerk. The reason Linux beat the BSDs is because Linus is a very nice guy. He created a community which, despite the harsh language, was very welcoming, and willing to mentor new people. The BSDs created elitist, closed-off communities, which were unwelcoming to newcomers. I would challenge that notion that using an aggressive and diminishing language doesn't imply being a jerk. Also keep in mind that BSD have legal challenges that GNU/Linux didn't so community is not the only reason why Linux won the popularity contest
  - dpark 10y ago
    You think Linux didn't have legal challenges? Where have you been since 2003?
    - ghaff 10y ago
      The legal challenges were at very different points in their lifetimes. It's at least arguable that the legal issues associated with AT&T and BSD kept it from becoming as mainstream as it might have. (As did the somewhat splintered community.) Linux OTOH was already well-established before the SCO suits.
paxcoder 10y ago
Logged in to upvote your comment, hopefully you won't be disuaded by downvotes. Maybe this whole "deal with my being unpleasant" thing stems from people seeking to justify their unwilingness or inability to practice self-control. Whatever the reason it is detrimental and worthy of being opposed to. It's one thing to be unpleasant to people who are obstinate. It's another to be unpleasant to people who are ignorant. And yet another to be rude to people who you simply disagree with.
- rpcastagna 10y ago
  I think ldfdr made a good point in his sibling comment that deeming something as "unpleasant" is highly tied to your personal perceptions of what civility is, etc, which is generally rooted in your culture and where you grew up. I think we have to work to understand each other as much as possible and understand people come into conversations with different expectations. I think with someone like Linus we also have to realize that as a community founder he has a disproportionate influence in setting community norms, and people who want to get involved will tend to naturally gravitate towards his communication style. You wouldn't go to France and demand that everyone speak English all the time; we have to work to accommodate each other, and part of that is not assigning value judgements to a communication style.
  - paxcoder 10y ago
    Linus' rudeness is not culture but an abandonement thereof. For being influential he should only be held to a higher standard. His bad example should certainly not be followed. Sincerely, your friendly non-native English co-speaker.
    - chc 10y ago
      Has Linus ever been rude to you? Have any of your friends complained about taking the brunt of his rudeness? If so, that would be really interesting. From what I've seen, there is basically nobody who has actually complained, "Linus was rude to me." It seems to be a meme that consists almost entirely of putting words in other people's mouths.
andrewbinstock 10y ago
I interviewed Knuth several years ago [1] and found him to be just as classy in person as his reputation suggests. An article I read in preparation for that interview described him as someone who made you feel smarter by simply interacting with him. I found this to be true as well. [1] http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193856 http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193856
- drzaiusapelord 10y ago
  >Remember, though, that my opinion on economic questions is highly suspect, since I’m just an educator and scientist. I understand almost nothing about the marketplace. Can you imagine guys like Musk, Kurzweil, Hawking, etc saying such a thing. It seems like its very in vogue to be a "man of everything" and "expert in all things" right now. Hawking writes about AI even though he's done zero AI research or any AI software engineering. Kurzweil sees himself as an expert in aging and medicine even though he holds no M.D. Musk is an endless source of 'big ideas' many of which are highly questionable and well outside of his wheelhouse of rocketry and cars. What a humbling response by Knuth. We can't we have more people like this?
pizza234 10y ago
It's important to keep in mind that they live in two opposite contexts. Knuth lives a more or less "monastic" life; he practically doesn't need to deal with anybody, while Torvalds is strictly entangled with an entire community. While this of course doesn't entirely justify both behaviors, the two contexts are certainly very influential on them.

willhslade 10y ago

Knuth is a one man shop. Torvalds is leading the biggest open source project in the world, and Jobs was leading one of America's largest corporations by market cap. Leading is different than writing.

cesarbs 10y ago
Being a leader does not justify being an asshole.
- pjc50 10y ago
  These days, it seems to be a requirement for getting elected.
- dpark 10y ago
  Nowhere did willhslade say that it does. He said that comparing Knuth's style to Torvalds's isn't very enlightening because they are fundamentally engaged in different activities. Comparing Knuth to Torvalds and saying "look, you don't have to be an asshole to be a great leader" is like comparing Usain Bolt to Dean Karnazes and saying "look, you don't have to be really muscular to be a great sprinter." The comparison is pointless because Karnazes isn't a sprinter just like Knuth isn't leading major software efforts. Find a successful leader of a large-scale piece of software who doesn't have a reputation for being an asshole and use them for the comparison.
  - pmelendez 10y ago
    >The comparison is pointless because Karnazes isn't a sprinter just like Knuth isn't leading major software efforts. That makes sense, except that OP said "You don't have to be a jerk to get ahead in life", he didn't mentioned being a leader. The followed commenters brought the leadership point into attention and then subtly implied that there is more correlation between being a jerk and a leader.
    - dpark 10y ago
      I was replying to cesarbs, who literally said "Being a leader does not justify being an asshole." Edit: And yes, the conversation pivoted to being a leader because that is a critical difference between Knuth and Torvalds which seems very relevant to this sort of comparison.
  - sedachv 10y ago
    > Find a successful leader of a large-scale piece of software who doesn't have a reputation for being an asshole and use them for the comparison. So pretty much everyone except for Torvalds and de Raadt? Those guys are the exception and not the rule.
    - merb 10y ago
      define large-scale? used in large-scale or has a large-scale developer base? for used in large-scale I know some, but they don't have a large-scale developer base.
    - scrollaway 10y ago
      Bezos, Ellison. I agree, still the exception, but I feel like it's extremely unfair to say "everyone except" and forget the devil himself :)
      - sedachv 10y ago
        From what I have read Bezos always had a minimal role in the technical management of Amazon other than yelling at people to work harder and micro-managing how amazon.com looked. I have not read anything about Ellison but cannot imagine he has been involved in managing Oracle the database vs Oracle the corporation since the late 1980s.
- wyager 10y ago
  It's a survival mechanism. Not everyone has the time or ability to be nice to everyone they have to deal with in a position like Torvalds'.
  - sedachv 10y ago
    > It's a survival mechanism. Not everyone has the time or ability to be nice to everyone they have to deal with in a position like Torvalds'. Flaming someone on a mailing list takes as much time as being nice to them. If it was about time then Linus could just ignore or dismiss things without going out of his way to type up insults.
    - wyager 10y ago
      > Flaming someone on a mailing list takes as much time as being nice to them. Not if you take into account the time saved by (strongly) discouraging people from wasting your time in the future. > If it was about time then Linus could just ignore or dismiss things No, you absolutely cannot do that. If you ignore people on software projects, they do not go away. They just get more convinced that they're right, which means getting more shrill and insistent.
- kislotnik 10y ago
  You don't tolerate them but want them to tolerate others. TBH, I'd be totally fine if Linus ranted over my code because that's the way he is and I don't believe in community that tries to isolate an individual because he/she doesn't have a popular mindset. Edit: typical -> popular
  - kevinh 10y ago
    That goes both ways, though, right? There are people who are isolated in the community because of the actions of hyper-critical people. The presence of people like Torvalds is isolating to others. I mean, sure, you may think that Torvalds provides more value than the people he isolates, but either way people are getting isolated.
    - kislotnik 10y ago
      Thanks, I got your point, and I don't value Torvalds over other people, but I value his kernel engineering skills over other people's kernel engineering skills. You know, if it has to be our decision whom to isolate, why not create a competitive community and vote for it with commits, instead of destroying the original community by removing Linus out of the office?
  - dbaupp 10y ago
    The whole "you're tolerant so you have to tolerate intolerance!!1!" thing is not some clever loophole, it's just a weak attempt to justify why people shouldn't be called out for being unpleasant/bigoted. http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tolerance#Paradox_of_tolerance http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Tolerance#Paradox_of_tolerance
    - Natsu 10y ago
      The "intolerance" Popper talked of preventing was this: "In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols." Cite: http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/25998-the-so-called-paradox-of-freedom-is-the-argument-that-freedom http://www.goodreads.com/quotes/25998-the-so-called-paradox-... So his justification for this was founded on a prevention of violence. We already have this in the USA, for example, in that we forbid incitement to violence, fighting words and the like. So unless you can show some strong nexus between these statements and actual, physical violence of some kind, you can't use Karl Popper as a justification.
- jmcdiesel 10y ago
  Jobs wasn't an asshole. People confuse directness with being an asshole. If your results suck, saying they suck isn't being an asshole. If you feel that something is horrible, sugar-coating it to make sure you don't hurt someone's feelings is unauthentic. Here's the difference... When someone says "your product sucks, throw it away" .. with the INTENT of causing that person to feel bad, thats being an ashhole. If you tell them that their product sucks because you genuinely feel that way, and you're simply communicating authentically, then you're not being an asshole, you're being authentic. Here's how you can tell the difference. The former in that example get stuck at best in middle management in low-quality companies... the latter finds themselves at the top.
  - Frondo 10y ago
    Guess what: being an asshole is in the eye of the beholder. If someone says I'm an asshole, I don't get to tell them they're wrong. It's how they feel about me, regardless of whatever I or anyone else feels. The absolute best I could do is say that they're alone in feeling that way. Lots of folks thought Steve Jobs was an asshole. You can say "well he was just direct" but that doesn't take away how they felt about him, or what their opinions are.
  - digler999 10y ago
    > Jobs wasn't an asshole. so the stories about him firing people on a whim weren't true ?
    - drzaiusapelord 10y ago
      Or that famous email telling everyone not to poach "his" employees. As if he has ownership over then like a feudal lord over serfs. Oh and that email ends with not very veiled patent lawsuit threat for anyone who disagrees? And you guys complain about your wages and working hours? Maybe don't deify the guy who worked against you and your interests his whole career.
- hurbledr 10y ago
  It can certainly justify being short with people though.
drzaiusapelord 10y ago
Oh, there's definitely a hermit vs ceo aspect here, but I really doubt it justifies being an anger prone leader with no filter. There are many leaders who aren't like this yet somehow they do okay and on the flipside many academics who are one-man shops who are massive jerks. I suspect tech draws in certain personality types (DIY types, aspies, loners, etc) who really never developed the social skills needed, didn't really do much teamwork when younger as tech is often a hermit's game, and fell into a position of authority and went with the default of bullying, which clearly gets results, but doesn't make for the best work environment. I find myself dealing with the same struggles at work. I can't believe how slow/stupid/careless so many of my co-workers are, but snapping at them is ultimately counter-productive and more than likely bad for my career. Frankly, I don't considering myself a good team player and I lean towards the hermit approach often. If I was the boss, who knows, I'd probably be a terror.

mmmpop 10y ago

Wow soapbox much? We get it, Linus is a big meanie.

ldfdr 10y ago

You're confusing being a jerk with communication styles and cultural differences. You'd never hire anyone from the American inner city, from parts of Scotland and Ireland, parts of New York, and similar. Some very nice people talk loudly, swear, and use politically incorrect language. This is part of the reason some URMs can't get ahead in US corporate culture. Yes, Linus does swear a lot, and uses aggressive language. That's part of his style, his culture, and how he communicates. No, he is not a jerk. The reason Linux beat the BSDs is because Linus is a very nice guy. He created a community which, despite the harsh language, was very welcoming, and willing to mentor new people. The BSDs created elitist, closed-off communities, which were unwelcoming to newcomers. If you made a mistake, the BSD communities would write you off. The Linux community would tell you what you did wrong, and how to fix it, even if they used harsh language to do so. The Linux culture is also quite meritocratic. It doesn't matter how you communicate, or how incompetent you were a year ago. If you're doing good technical work today, you're welcome. More than other cultures, arguments are taken at technical face value, not by who makes them.

pmelendez 10y ago
>No, he is not a jerk. The reason Linux beat the BSDs is because Linus is a very nice guy. He created a community which, despite the harsh language, was very welcoming, and willing to mentor new people. The BSDs created elitist, closed-off communities, which were unwelcoming to newcomers. I would challenge that notion that using an aggressive and diminishing language doesn't imply being a jerk. Also keep in mind that BSD have legal challenges that GNU/Linux didn't so community is not the only reason why Linux won the popularity contest
- dpark 10y ago
  You think Linux didn't have legal challenges? Where have you been since 2003?
  - ghaff 10y ago
    The legal challenges were at very different points in their lifetimes. It's at least arguable that the legal issues associated with AT&T and BSD kept it from becoming as mainstream as it might have. (As did the somewhat splintered community.) Linux OTOH was already well-established before the SCO suits.

paxcoder 10y ago

Logged in to upvote your comment, hopefully you won't be disuaded by downvotes. Maybe this whole "deal with my being unpleasant" thing stems from people seeking to justify their unwilingness or inability to practice self-control. Whatever the reason it is detrimental and worthy of being opposed to. It's one thing to be unpleasant to people who are obstinate. It's another to be unpleasant to people who are ignorant. And yet another to be rude to people who you simply disagree with.

rpcastagna 10y ago
I think ldfdr made a good point in his sibling comment that deeming something as "unpleasant" is highly tied to your personal perceptions of what civility is, etc, which is generally rooted in your culture and where you grew up. I think we have to work to understand each other as much as possible and understand people come into conversations with different expectations. I think with someone like Linus we also have to realize that as a community founder he has a disproportionate influence in setting community norms, and people who want to get involved will tend to naturally gravitate towards his communication style. You wouldn't go to France and demand that everyone speak English all the time; we have to work to accommodate each other, and part of that is not assigning value judgements to a communication style.
- paxcoder 10y ago
  Linus' rudeness is not culture but an abandonement thereof. For being influential he should only be held to a higher standard. His bad example should certainly not be followed. Sincerely, your friendly non-native English co-speaker.
  - chc 10y ago
    Has Linus ever been rude to you? Have any of your friends complained about taking the brunt of his rudeness? If so, that would be really interesting. From what I've seen, there is basically nobody who has actually complained, "Linus was rude to me." It seems to be a meme that consists almost entirely of putting words in other people's mouths.

andrewbinstock 10y ago

I interviewed Knuth several years ago [1] and found him to be just as classy in person as his reputation suggests. An article I read in preparation for that interview described him as someone who made you feel smarter by simply interacting with him. I found this to be true as well. [1] http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193856 http://www.informit.com/articles/article.aspx?p=1193856

drzaiusapelord 10y ago
>Remember, though, that my opinion on economic questions is highly suspect, since I’m just an educator and scientist. I understand almost nothing about the marketplace. Can you imagine guys like Musk, Kurzweil, Hawking, etc saying such a thing. It seems like its very in vogue to be a "man of everything" and "expert in all things" right now. Hawking writes about AI even though he's done zero AI research or any AI software engineering. Kurzweil sees himself as an expert in aging and medicine even though he holds no M.D. Musk is an endless source of 'big ideas' many of which are highly questionable and well outside of his wheelhouse of rocketry and cars. What a humbling response by Knuth. We can't we have more people like this?

pizza234 10y ago

It's important to keep in mind that they live in two opposite contexts. Knuth lives a more or less "monastic" life; he practically doesn't need to deal with anybody, while Torvalds is strictly entangled with an entire community. While this of course doesn't entirely justify both behaviors, the two contexts are certainly very influential on them.