5 ms·

Ironically while arguing one side of the case he becomes an example supporting the other. He sounds so grumpy and closed minded. Who'd want to hire him? His

by pg 16y ago

Ironically while arguing one side of the case he becomes an example supporting the other. He sounds so grumpy and closed minded. Who'd want to hire him? His thesis that technology hasn't changed is false in any case. E.g. while the fundamentals of algorithms haven't changed, that sort of knowledge is less central than it used to be; for better or worse, software development seems to be evolving into something where you glue together building blocks made by other people rather than writing everything yourself.

neilk 16y ago
Could we use this to make a new heuristic for knowing when one is being closed-minded? You're good at coming up with those sorts of things. The "X is exactly the same as Y" is one, I think. I got in an argument with someone who asserted that Twitter was exactly the same as the old Unix utility 'talk'. Of course, how do you distinguish between obviously boring reinventions and stuff that really will have an impact?
- nostrademons 16y ago
  My Intro Philosophy professor phrased it like this: "If you want to sound smart in front of your friends, make a distinction." Our judgments of how intelligent people are usually come from how many relevant details they are able to see that we would otherwise have missed. So someone who asserts that Twitter is exactly the same as 'talk' is dumb. Someone who asserts that Twitter is exactly the same as 'talk', except that it's on the web, and it can broadcast to multiple people, and it's limited to 140 characters, and the social norms surrounding its use are different, and it's frequently used to share URLs that are automatically shortened, and that this practice is controversial because it breaks the decentralized nature of the web, sounds slightly more intelligent.
  - neilk 16y ago
    Yeah, but I think your philosophy prof was suggesting that useless distinctions are the stock in trade of tiny minds. For instance, a web client that allows you to use IRC protocol is generally Just-The-Same-As-IRC. Putting it on the web doesn't do anything really different, except maybe that one doesn't have the inconvenience of installing IRC software. But let's say that you had a really good help channel for your website, but that users of your website didn't typically find their way to IRC. Putting an IRC client right in the web page itself, configured to go straight to this help channel, is suddenly more of an innovation. I don't know how to phrase this right, but there is a knack of noticing material distinctions, rather than useless ones. Maybe it's in noticing when certain limitations have been removed or added. Maybe the real problem is that we're often unaware of how limited our world is, and what is doing the limiting. Perhaps the only way to notice when limitations have been removed is by sheer luck or that mysterious force called "creativity". You couldn't have a mind that was constantly probing every tool for every limitation. Could you?
    - nostrademons 16y ago
      "You couldn't have a mind that was constantly probing every tool for every limitation. Could you?" Isn't this called "engineering"?
    - gyepi 16y ago
      """I don't know how to phrase this right, but there is a knack of noticing material distinctions, rather than useless ones. Maybe it's in noticing when certain limitations have been removed or added."""" Knowing when a distinction is material frequently depends on context, goals, and experience. As Louis Pasteur said, "Chance favors only the prepared mind." I would be a little more generous, but still he's essentially right.
- pg 16y ago
  The problem is, some of the biggest discoveries have been of the form "x is the same as y." Interesting question whether you could auto-detect closed mindedness though. One sign might be when people stop being surprised, or realizing that some earlier theory of theirs was wrong (which amount to the same thing).
tonystubblebine 16y ago
Well, Dave Winer brings his own personal baggage that's not related to general ageism. But maybe other experienced people just need some help presenting their knowledge in a way that's easier for young people to take. It's really easy to come off as grumpy and entitled otherwise.
- brlewis 16y ago
  Making something -- a web app or free software -- would be a good way to present knowledge, except that people who make things still need some help presenting what they've made.
maddalab 16y ago
The grumpy-ness aside which is difficult to judge in an unbiased manner and every one for himself, the question is still relevant, and something that I can relate to tho not being in the affected age segment. I look around at my last 2 work places and have yet to meet more than the occasional mid-40s professional who is in positions of technical ownership. Most of them have moved into positions of management (paper pushers for the most part), architects (whatever that means) or moved out (to whatever it is they do, hopefully something interesting). Those who did move into management and position involving architecture were not necessarily more technically proficient than those who moved out, with a history of accomplishments that identified them as suitable for those positions. In most cases it was just a case of who one was acquainted with. Put simply the technical field is not a meritocracy beyond a certain watermark. I have yet to hear a cogent argument on why folks in their late 40s or early 50s are not adequately represented in programming positions start ups or otherwise. What is unique about programming as a practice that make it unsuitable for professional beyond a certain age? In most professions that have similar age barriers to early exit (sports comes to mind immediately) one case expect to be compensated handsomely for the short while that one has is holding on to the position, this is not the case with programming. Leaving aside the argument that most programming positions do not require any education because they are no longer "creative" functions just functions of component "assembly" and as such do not require the experience gained from years of practice, what changes does the industry require to undertake to effective use the experience of folks who have worked hard to gain it? I certainly do not have the answers.
- pg 16y ago
  The answer may be related to the early age at which mathematicians seem to peak. Another factor is the rate of change in technology. Mere experience may be an obstacle there. When you start knowing nothing and pick a technology to learn, you naturally tend to pick the newest one. Whereas for an old person, learning new technologies is something you do out of duty as much as eagerness. An old person learning new technologies is keeping current. A young person learning the same new technology is learning to build stuff, which is much more exciting.
  - 16y ago
danilocampos 16y ago
It's funny you say this. I had a nagging feeling I couldn't sort out while I was reading his post. It boils down to just what you said. The thing with Dave Winer is that I've never read his stuff and thought "What a fascinating, energizing insight this fellow is sharing. I must read more!" Instead, I'm left thinking he comes off as such a bitter, grouchy sourpuss who's really impressed that once upon a time he invented RSS. I mean, no kidding, look at the post previous to this one: "And everyone was hogging every inch of the road, including my bits of the road. Lots of near-misses, cars driving in the bike lanes, and people walking and riding four a-breast." Oh. So your blog's raison d'être truly is just to grouse about everything. That's cool, but you generally have to be really funny to make that work in the long term. I don't think his age has anything to do with the fact that people don't want to work with him. I think people don't want to work with him because by and large, the things he has to say are neither fun nor interesting.
jemfinch 16y ago
Technology hasn't changed if you want to be one of the people building the blocks rather than gluing other people's blocks together.
ojbyrne 16y ago
Not exactly thrilled by the use of the word "grumpy" since its a typical code word used to denigrate people over forty, very much like "pushy" blacks and "bitchy" women. If Dave was 25, I'd almost guarantee you wouldn't use that word. In fact just by using that single word you've strengthened his argument.
- DannoHung 16y ago
  Disgruntled? No? Well, you know what I say about people who complain about "codewords"; provide a better word or shut the fuck up.
  - deleted 16y ago
    [deleted]
- tbrownaw 16y ago
  It is, really? I know I've heard all of those words used for people not in the groups you say they're code for, and hadn't been aware of any such associations.
- brilliant 16y ago
  That's what they call a "dog whistle" term. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics
- pg 16y ago
  It's impossible to imagine that post being written by someone who was 25. Seriously; go back and read it.
  - ojbyrne 16y ago
    Disagree. It's easy to imagine that being written by a 25 year black man in 1955, or a 25 year old woman in 1965. It's angry, not "grumpy." Concerning technology, Dave has a specific thesis in mind, that I think has at least a little merit. Quite simply, large technology companies push "innovation" that has little actual value to the public at large. They do this to create barriers to entry so that smaller companies who devote less than 100% of their resources to keep up with the technology that the big companies champion (i.e. they devote some resources to sales, marketing, creating a business) get marginalized.
helmut_hed 16y ago
I've got to come in on Dave's side on this one. He does not say that "technology hasn't changed." Here is what he says: "And if you think there's much difference between JavaScript and C, you're dreaming. Or between JSON and XML or plain text files. These are gratuitous reinventions." Bear in mind that he is taking a very high level view here, and think about what he's saying again. Are not JSON and XML, fundamentally, simply better ways to put structured data into text files with formats everyone can agree on? Sure, they are better approaches than what preceded them (CSV? random ad-hoc formats?), but fundamentally, if I said the previous sentence to a programmer who gone into a coma in 1985 and just now woke up, wouldn't they understand it pretty quickly? As for JavaScript and C, well, the syntax is C-like, and you add closures, a class system, and some standard scripting language features like built-in containers and a slack typing model, as far as I can tell from coming up to speed on it recently. Wouldn't this stuff be familiar to someone who'd learned and coded in a number of different languages in their career? Surely with a few examples to follow they could be up to speed quickly. Now, of course he's exaggerating, and venting a bit as well. But for a programmer with a lot of experience, these innovations don't seem that special. Good ideas, sure, but not enough to make everything you've learned obsolete.
- ScottBurson 16y ago
  JSON and XML (especially XML) are not better approaches than what preceded them. S-expressions have been around since 1958.

by pg 16y ago

neilk 16y ago

Could we use this to make a new heuristic for knowing when one is being closed-minded? You're good at coming up with those sorts of things. The "X is exactly the same as Y" is one, I think. I got in an argument with someone who asserted that Twitter was exactly the same as the old Unix utility 'talk'. Of course, how do you distinguish between obviously boring reinventions and stuff that really will have an impact?

nostrademons 16y ago
My Intro Philosophy professor phrased it like this: "If you want to sound smart in front of your friends, make a distinction." Our judgments of how intelligent people are usually come from how many relevant details they are able to see that we would otherwise have missed. So someone who asserts that Twitter is exactly the same as 'talk' is dumb. Someone who asserts that Twitter is exactly the same as 'talk', except that it's on the web, and it can broadcast to multiple people, and it's limited to 140 characters, and the social norms surrounding its use are different, and it's frequently used to share URLs that are automatically shortened, and that this practice is controversial because it breaks the decentralized nature of the web, sounds slightly more intelligent.
- neilk 16y ago
  Yeah, but I think your philosophy prof was suggesting that useless distinctions are the stock in trade of tiny minds. For instance, a web client that allows you to use IRC protocol is generally Just-The-Same-As-IRC. Putting it on the web doesn't do anything really different, except maybe that one doesn't have the inconvenience of installing IRC software. But let's say that you had a really good help channel for your website, but that users of your website didn't typically find their way to IRC. Putting an IRC client right in the web page itself, configured to go straight to this help channel, is suddenly more of an innovation. I don't know how to phrase this right, but there is a knack of noticing material distinctions, rather than useless ones. Maybe it's in noticing when certain limitations have been removed or added. Maybe the real problem is that we're often unaware of how limited our world is, and what is doing the limiting. Perhaps the only way to notice when limitations have been removed is by sheer luck or that mysterious force called "creativity". You couldn't have a mind that was constantly probing every tool for every limitation. Could you?
  - nostrademons 16y ago
    "You couldn't have a mind that was constantly probing every tool for every limitation. Could you?" Isn't this called "engineering"?
  - gyepi 16y ago
    """I don't know how to phrase this right, but there is a knack of noticing material distinctions, rather than useless ones. Maybe it's in noticing when certain limitations have been removed or added."""" Knowing when a distinction is material frequently depends on context, goals, and experience. As Louis Pasteur said, "Chance favors only the prepared mind." I would be a little more generous, but still he's essentially right.
pg 16y ago
The problem is, some of the biggest discoveries have been of the form "x is the same as y." Interesting question whether you could auto-detect closed mindedness though. One sign might be when people stop being surprised, or realizing that some earlier theory of theirs was wrong (which amount to the same thing).

tonystubblebine 16y ago

Well, Dave Winer brings his own personal baggage that's not related to general ageism. But maybe other experienced people just need some help presenting their knowledge in a way that's easier for young people to take. It's really easy to come off as grumpy and entitled otherwise.

brlewis 16y ago
Making something -- a web app or free software -- would be a good way to present knowledge, except that people who make things still need some help presenting what they've made.

maddalab 16y ago

The grumpy-ness aside which is difficult to judge in an unbiased manner and every one for himself, the question is still relevant, and something that I can relate to tho not being in the affected age segment. I look around at my last 2 work places and have yet to meet more than the occasional mid-40s professional who is in positions of technical ownership. Most of them have moved into positions of management (paper pushers for the most part), architects (whatever that means) or moved out (to whatever it is they do, hopefully something interesting). Those who did move into management and position involving architecture were not necessarily more technically proficient than those who moved out, with a history of accomplishments that identified them as suitable for those positions. In most cases it was just a case of who one was acquainted with. Put simply the technical field is not a meritocracy beyond a certain watermark. I have yet to hear a cogent argument on why folks in their late 40s or early 50s are not adequately represented in programming positions start ups or otherwise. What is unique about programming as a practice that make it unsuitable for professional beyond a certain age? In most professions that have similar age barriers to early exit (sports comes to mind immediately) one case expect to be compensated handsomely for the short while that one has is holding on to the position, this is not the case with programming. Leaving aside the argument that most programming positions do not require any education because they are no longer "creative" functions just functions of component "assembly" and as such do not require the experience gained from years of practice, what changes does the industry require to undertake to effective use the experience of folks who have worked hard to gain it? I certainly do not have the answers.

pg 16y ago
The answer may be related to the early age at which mathematicians seem to peak. Another factor is the rate of change in technology. Mere experience may be an obstacle there. When you start knowing nothing and pick a technology to learn, you naturally tend to pick the newest one. Whereas for an old person, learning new technologies is something you do out of duty as much as eagerness. An old person learning new technologies is keeping current. A young person learning the same new technology is learning to build stuff, which is much more exciting.
- 16y ago

danilocampos 16y ago

It's funny you say this. I had a nagging feeling I couldn't sort out while I was reading his post. It boils down to just what you said. The thing with Dave Winer is that I've never read his stuff and thought "What a fascinating, energizing insight this fellow is sharing. I must read more!" Instead, I'm left thinking he comes off as such a bitter, grouchy sourpuss who's really impressed that once upon a time he invented RSS. I mean, no kidding, look at the post previous to this one: "And everyone was hogging every inch of the road, including my bits of the road. Lots of near-misses, cars driving in the bike lanes, and people walking and riding four a-breast." Oh. So your blog's raison d'être truly is just to grouse about everything. That's cool, but you generally have to be really funny to make that work in the long term. I don't think his age has anything to do with the fact that people don't want to work with him. I think people don't want to work with him because by and large, the things he has to say are neither fun nor interesting.

jemfinch 16y ago

Technology hasn't changed if you want to be one of the people building the blocks rather than gluing other people's blocks together.

ojbyrne 16y ago

Not exactly thrilled by the use of the word "grumpy" since its a typical code word used to denigrate people over forty, very much like "pushy" blacks and "bitchy" women. If Dave was 25, I'd almost guarantee you wouldn't use that word. In fact just by using that single word you've strengthened his argument.

DannoHung 16y ago
Disgruntled? No? Well, you know what I say about people who complain about "codewords"; provide a better word or shut the fuck up.
- deleted 16y ago
  [deleted]
tbrownaw 16y ago
It is, really? I know I've heard all of those words used for people not in the groups you say they're code for, and hadn't been aware of any such associations.
brilliant 16y ago
That's what they call a "dog whistle" term. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics
pg 16y ago
It's impossible to imagine that post being written by someone who was 25. Seriously; go back and read it.
- ojbyrne 16y ago
  Disagree. It's easy to imagine that being written by a 25 year black man in 1955, or a 25 year old woman in 1965. It's angry, not "grumpy." Concerning technology, Dave has a specific thesis in mind, that I think has at least a little merit. Quite simply, large technology companies push "innovation" that has little actual value to the public at large. They do this to create barriers to entry so that smaller companies who devote less than 100% of their resources to keep up with the technology that the big companies champion (i.e. they devote some resources to sales, marketing, creating a business) get marginalized.

helmut_hed 16y ago

I've got to come in on Dave's side on this one. He does not say that "technology hasn't changed." Here is what he says: "And if you think there's much difference between JavaScript and C, you're dreaming. Or between JSON and XML or plain text files. These are gratuitous reinventions." Bear in mind that he is taking a very high level view here, and think about what he's saying again. Are not JSON and XML, fundamentally, simply better ways to put structured data into text files with formats everyone can agree on? Sure, they are better approaches than what preceded them (CSV? random ad-hoc formats?), but fundamentally, if I said the previous sentence to a programmer who gone into a coma in 1985 and just now woke up, wouldn't they understand it pretty quickly? As for JavaScript and C, well, the syntax is C-like, and you add closures, a class system, and some standard scripting language features like built-in containers and a slack typing model, as far as I can tell from coming up to speed on it recently. Wouldn't this stuff be familiar to someone who'd learned and coded in a number of different languages in their career? Surely with a few examples to follow they could be up to speed quickly. Now, of course he's exaggerating, and venting a bit as well. But for a programmer with a lot of experience, these innovations don't seem that special. Good ideas, sure, but not enough to make everything you've learned obsolete.

ScottBurson 16y ago
JSON and XML (especially XML) are not better approaches than what preceded them. S-expressions have been around since 1958.