3 ms·

No that's not it. It's toxicity of a culture of elitism and a fetishizing of language purity. People get pilled on languages and tools. It's totally unhealthy

No that's not it. It's toxicity of a culture of elitism and a fetishizing of language purity. People get pilled on languages and tools. It's totally unhealthy. They guide decisions based on faith and optimism and never check back in with reality

yepthatsreality 6y ago
Yes and no. I see this with junior developers who think they’ve gain senior insight. Really they just learned to be efficient with a specific set of tools. JS for example is loved by Junior devs. However due to JS’s flexibility they may later decide they like Typescript because typing can eliminate edge cases that JS is flexible with. The knowledge gain isn’t whether Typescript is a better language or not but that the developer learned why more experienced developers prefer using Typescript. Something that may have been pounded into their brain but was just noise until they were forced to deal with it.
- kristopolous 6y ago
  Sorry that's still not it. Languages and tools exist as socially created institutions. They have all the same entrapments and faults as any other institution. Orthodoxy, zealotry, blind loyalty, mobbing, cultist behavior, these can happen in any human institution; a subreddit, financial institution, political party, exercise system, startup, religion, and yes, even computer software. It doesn't have to, but the point is it can and we shouldn't ignore the tripwires. Computers don't magically make the humans that use them immune from such possibilities
  - yepthatsreality 6y ago
    That's not it. None of those problems are caused by elitism for a language. Advocating and language elitism are symptoms of larger ideas. Attacking elitism in language choice is silly and a waste of time as it's naturally inclined to happen. People do give a shit and for a myriad of reasons.
    - kristopolous 6y ago
      Elitism for idealism is exactly what it is. That's exactly the problem. It's all about trying to avoid haphazardly creating cults. People don't really set out to create cults, they arise out of a set of reasonable intentions that can manifest as toxic institutions. People want things to be utilized, relied upon, popular, talked about, exciting, enjoyed, make people feel special, etc. All good, as long as we're being careful. I just described Jim Jones, heavens gate and astrophysics or an entertaining movie. Being careful about culture is important. We want to have robust, healthy, long lasting, respectable institutions in computing. To be simplistic, snobbery isn't a good fit
      - yepthatsreality 6y ago
        Good luck with fighting it. As the author said, no one cares.
        kristopolous 6y ago
        I recently started a book on this topic. Hopefully it'll be something I'm proud of. I know there's more writers than readers so that's really my only expectation. Thanks
        yepthatsreality 6y ago
        I look forward to see said results and encourage any change that could happen. My previous comment isn't meant to be curt, but honestly the author of the article did not propose a solution so in essence this article comes off as no more than a complain. Which is equivalent to complaining about "X person should have used Y language". > The elitist fucktards that create these social classes do so because it makes them feel important. This is from the article, do we honestly believe that these things are created by the people saying them intentionally? As we just discussed this isn't a phenomenon, it organically happens inside of human organization. I'm curious what level of social posturing and manners is required to avoid it. Is the solution to have "social-justice warriors"-like people patrolling Twitter and work platforms and correcting them? Especially in the notion of public platforms on the internet, a lot of things are often taken out of context. Not every comment about "X language should be used" is a malicious elitism.
devoutsalsa 6y ago
I drank the Ruby Kool-Aid when I first got into programming. I thought it you weren't using Ruby on Rails, Heroku, Postgres, TDD, Cucumber, etc. that you were doing it wrong. I tried to take that attitude into my first couple jobs & it didn't serve me well at all. After nearly burning myself out on trying to find the right way to do things, only to realize that programming is more art than science & there are tradeoffs w/ every approach, now I'm more in the http://programming-motherfucker.com/ http://programming-motherfucker.com/ camp.
- silicon2401 6y ago
  to be fair, if you start with ruby on rails, it's hard to understand why anybody would use something else. at first ruby felt horribly cryptic compared to the Java and C++ I studied in school, but once I got better at it, I fell in love. unfortunately I've only used Java and Javascript ever since lol. serious analysis aside, ruby and rails are awesome tools and were a ton of fun when I used them for work
- haskellandchill 6y ago
  Programming can and should be be both art and science. Ruby is not a particularly good vehicle for this approach, it is heavy on the art. A book and course showed up here recently that covers some of the science in a beginner friendly manner: A Practical Theory of Programming (http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/aPToP/ http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/aPToP/). Unfortunately the material on combining the art and science of software and applying them to practical business problems is a little thin. I'd like to contribute with a project I'm working on, A Working Programmer's Guide to Working Programs, which is a play on words for working out programs like working out algebraic equations or proofs, and in the process demonstrating the programs are working. PS I drank the Ruby Kool-Aid as well. I agree it was very tasty. I even at one point was a Ruby Engineer, as if that means anything :)
haskellandchill 6y ago
> toxicity of a culture of elitism and a fetishizing of language purity While you use words like toxicity, elitism, and fetishizing, a positive take could be given. Say instead there is a nourishing culture of experts, core contributors who mentor those interested and write articles expounding the language's culture. And that language purity is a meta reasoning tool that enables engineers to focus on business problems rather than the quirks of a language lacking conceptual purity.
- AnimalMuppet 6y ago
  "A nourishing culture of experts, etc" is not at all a positive take on "toxicity, elitism, and fetishizing". It's the polar opposite. Note well: I'm not taking a position on whether your particular group is toxic or nourishing. I'm just saying that you can't spin one as the other.

yepthatsreality 6y ago

Yes and no. I see this with junior developers who think they’ve gain senior insight. Really they just learned to be efficient with a specific set of tools. JS for example is loved by Junior devs. However due to JS’s flexibility they may later decide they like Typescript because typing can eliminate edge cases that JS is flexible with. The knowledge gain isn’t whether Typescript is a better language or not but that the developer learned why more experienced developers prefer using Typescript. Something that may have been pounded into their brain but was just noise until they were forced to deal with it.

kristopolous 6y ago
Sorry that's still not it. Languages and tools exist as socially created institutions. They have all the same entrapments and faults as any other institution. Orthodoxy, zealotry, blind loyalty, mobbing, cultist behavior, these can happen in any human institution; a subreddit, financial institution, political party, exercise system, startup, religion, and yes, even computer software. It doesn't have to, but the point is it can and we shouldn't ignore the tripwires. Computers don't magically make the humans that use them immune from such possibilities
- yepthatsreality 6y ago
  That's not it. None of those problems are caused by elitism for a language. Advocating and language elitism are symptoms of larger ideas. Attacking elitism in language choice is silly and a waste of time as it's naturally inclined to happen. People do give a shit and for a myriad of reasons.
  - kristopolous 6y ago
    Elitism for idealism is exactly what it is. That's exactly the problem. It's all about trying to avoid haphazardly creating cults. People don't really set out to create cults, they arise out of a set of reasonable intentions that can manifest as toxic institutions. People want things to be utilized, relied upon, popular, talked about, exciting, enjoyed, make people feel special, etc. All good, as long as we're being careful. I just described Jim Jones, heavens gate and astrophysics or an entertaining movie. Being careful about culture is important. We want to have robust, healthy, long lasting, respectable institutions in computing. To be simplistic, snobbery isn't a good fit
    - yepthatsreality 6y ago
      Good luck with fighting it. As the author said, no one cares.
      - kristopolous 6y ago
        I recently started a book on this topic. Hopefully it'll be something I'm proud of. I know there's more writers than readers so that's really my only expectation. Thanks
        yepthatsreality 6y ago
        I look forward to see said results and encourage any change that could happen. My previous comment isn't meant to be curt, but honestly the author of the article did not propose a solution so in essence this article comes off as no more than a complain. Which is equivalent to complaining about "X person should have used Y language". > The elitist fucktards that create these social classes do so because it makes them feel important. This is from the article, do we honestly believe that these things are created by the people saying them intentionally? As we just discussed this isn't a phenomenon, it organically happens inside of human organization. I'm curious what level of social posturing and manners is required to avoid it. Is the solution to have "social-justice warriors"-like people patrolling Twitter and work platforms and correcting them? Especially in the notion of public platforms on the internet, a lot of things are often taken out of context. Not every comment about "X language should be used" is a malicious elitism.

devoutsalsa 6y ago

I drank the Ruby Kool-Aid when I first got into programming. I thought it you weren't using Ruby on Rails, Heroku, Postgres, TDD, Cucumber, etc. that you were doing it wrong. I tried to take that attitude into my first couple jobs & it didn't serve me well at all. After nearly burning myself out on trying to find the right way to do things, only to realize that programming is more art than science & there are tradeoffs w/ every approach, now I'm more in the http://programming-motherfucker.com/ http://programming-motherfucker.com/ camp.

silicon2401 6y ago
to be fair, if you start with ruby on rails, it's hard to understand why anybody would use something else. at first ruby felt horribly cryptic compared to the Java and C++ I studied in school, but once I got better at it, I fell in love. unfortunately I've only used Java and Javascript ever since lol. serious analysis aside, ruby and rails are awesome tools and were a ton of fun when I used them for work
haskellandchill 6y ago
Programming can and should be be both art and science. Ruby is not a particularly good vehicle for this approach, it is heavy on the art. A book and course showed up here recently that covers some of the science in a beginner friendly manner: A Practical Theory of Programming (http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/aPToP/ http://www.cs.toronto.edu/~hehner/aPToP/). Unfortunately the material on combining the art and science of software and applying them to practical business problems is a little thin. I'd like to contribute with a project I'm working on, A Working Programmer's Guide to Working Programs, which is a play on words for working out programs like working out algebraic equations or proofs, and in the process demonstrating the programs are working. PS I drank the Ruby Kool-Aid as well. I agree it was very tasty. I even at one point was a Ruby Engineer, as if that means anything :)

haskellandchill 6y ago

> toxicity of a culture of elitism and a fetishizing of language purity While you use words like toxicity, elitism, and fetishizing, a positive take could be given. Say instead there is a nourishing culture of experts, core contributors who mentor those interested and write articles expounding the language's culture. And that language purity is a meta reasoning tool that enables engineers to focus on business problems rather than the quirks of a language lacking conceptual purity.

AnimalMuppet 6y ago
"A nourishing culture of experts, etc" is not at all a positive take on "toxicity, elitism, and fetishizing". It's the polar opposite. Note well: I'm not taking a position on whether your particular group is toxic or nourishing. I'm just saying that you can't spin one as the other.