5 ms·

> It comes across as though the author is just vaguely angry at the loose concept of software. I'd dare to call it pretentious: "your code is bad and it's your

> It comes across as though the author is just vaguely angry at the loose concept of software. I'd dare to call it pretentious: "your code is bad and it's your fault the world is a mess but I, the genius not at fault for and detached from any of this, know how to fix all of it".

kiriakasis 8y ago
I read it more as a two part rant, first "all code is bad and what is good will become bad" with a shade of resignation then "the source of badness is in how we set our own goals as an industry and we should strive to change them". Overall it seems quite reasonable except maybe for the tone that was off-putting to many apparently
pdimitar 8y ago
It's only your choice to read it that way. I read it as: "We can do better but the current way of doing things looks broken to me. We should start by replacing it with something VERY different."
- rc-1140 8y ago
  > It's only your choice to read it that way. That's not how any kind of writing works. You aren't allowed to go, "This is what I wrote, but the way this poster wrote it is what I actually mean." The author will always carry some of the responsibility for interpretation via the words and grammar they use. Reader interpretation is not a way to handwave criticism of the writer's tone or the content they share.
  - pdimitar 8y ago
    IMO that's exactly how most of the writing works -- especially if it is non-scientific as this post is. Basically, how you choose to read it is a part of the experience, like reading a literature. Hence I believe that people are projecting while reading it. I know I did.
rntz 8y ago
I'm sorry it comes across that way. I certainly could have been more precise, but I wrote this to express a certain feeling, and felt that I couldn't improve it without losing something essential. Maybe someday I'll write something more analytic and less emotional. I think a lot of code is bad, and the world is a mess. But I have no idea about your code, and I'm not sure who is at fault, or even if that's a useful question to ask. I'm certainly no genius, and I definitely don't know how to fix all of it.

kiriakasis 8y ago

I read it more as a two part rant, first "all code is bad and what is good will become bad" with a shade of resignation then "the source of badness is in how we set our own goals as an industry and we should strive to change them". Overall it seems quite reasonable except maybe for the tone that was off-putting to many apparently

pdimitar 8y ago

It's only your choice to read it that way. I read it as: "We can do better but the current way of doing things looks broken to me. We should start by replacing it with something VERY different."

rc-1140 8y ago
> It's only your choice to read it that way. That's not how any kind of writing works. You aren't allowed to go, "This is what I wrote, but the way this poster wrote it is what I actually mean." The author will always carry some of the responsibility for interpretation via the words and grammar they use. Reader interpretation is not a way to handwave criticism of the writer's tone or the content they share.
- pdimitar 8y ago
  IMO that's exactly how most of the writing works -- especially if it is non-scientific as this post is. Basically, how you choose to read it is a part of the experience, like reading a literature. Hence I believe that people are projecting while reading it. I know I did.

rntz 8y ago

I'm sorry it comes across that way. I certainly could have been more precise, but I wrote this to express a certain feeling, and felt that I couldn't improve it without losing something essential. Maybe someday I'll write something more analytic and less emotional. I think a lot of code is bad, and the world is a mess. But I have no idea about your code, and I'm not sure who is at fault, or even if that's a useful question to ask. I'm certainly no genius, and I definitely don't know how to fix all of it.