3 ms·
I think you're being a bit too diplomatic by calling it 'optimism' about Arc's eventual success .. to me at the time (and even more so now) it was more like hub
by mmjaa 8y ago
I think you're being a bit too diplomatic by calling it 'optimism' about Arc's eventual success .. to me at the time (and even more so now) it was more like hubris.
Personally, one of the most important principles for creating new things that I care about, is this: "check yourself before you wreck yourself" .. this means, be sure you're aware of your own hubris before you foist it upon others.
And I think the fact that Arc is relegated to the dustbin of failure demonstrates this even more so today. Hubris is a principle cause of unproductive behaviour in the technology industry, imho. Probably the #1 reason why things fail: people are not self-aware to the point of accurately recognising when their own hubris is getting in the way of success...
- agumonkey 8y agoMaybe it was too ambitiously propped up. But it was also too early to get trendy. And it's a lisp, the amount of people that can appreciate arc's feature is probably a 4 digit figure.
- jungler 8y agoWith respect to programming languages, most software, and most creative works, all states of the lifecycle seem to be bad at some level: 1. It's just an idea/it's just a prototype. 2. It works but it doesn't support everything I want to do. 3. It supports everything but it's not the way I want to solve the problem. 4. I guess I'll have to reinvent the wheel to show them how it's done... The only real terminus to this cycle is when you've actually communicated the thing you want to communicate, which is quite difficult to do in the form of a programming language.