3 ms·
Reminds me of the first couple of pages from SICP[1]: ``I think that it's extraordinarily important that we in computer science keep fun in computing. When i
by muds 5y ago
Reminds me of the first couple of pages from SICP[1]:
``I think that it's extraordinarily important that we in computer science keep fun in computing. When it started out, it was an awful lot of fun. Of course, the paying customers got shafted every now and then, and after a while we began to take their complaints seriously. We began to feel as if we really were responsible for the successful, error-free perfect use of these machines. I don't think we are. I think we're responsible for stretching them, setting them off in new directions, and keeping fun in the house. I hope the field of computer science never loses its sense of fun. Above all, I hope we don't become missionaries. Don't feel as if you're Bible salesmen. The world has too many of those already. What you know about computing other people will learn. Don't feel as if the key to successful computing is only in your hands. What's in your hands, I think and hope, is intelligence: the ability to see the machine as more than when you were first led up to it, that you can make it more.''
[1] <https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/index.html https://mitpress.mit.edu/sites/default/files/sicp/index.html>
- smithza 5y agoI like that. It also reminds me of Fred Brook's second essay in the Mythical Man-Month. He elucidates that SW engineer's optimism can often be an issue with schedule. Too often SW engineers don't carry the humility that they make mistakes and that they constantly expect fewer bugs exist than do by the time test time comes along.