4 ms·
Great creation is never done in isolation. However, I think there's a mismatch of definitions. Getting to a destination, and seeing the big picture usually tak
by jarjoura 4y ago
Great creation is never done in isolation.
However, I think there's a mismatch of definitions. Getting to a destination, and seeing the big picture usually takes a lot of minds to envision. Once you know the destination, then in most industries, it falls back on the individual to figure out how to get to that destination. That's the quiet part.
In the software industry, it's both collaborative and solo at the same time. How many projects have you worked on where someone comes in and clobbers code you've just committed and then there's merge conflicts and wasted effort trying to understand what they were doing? If that hasn't happened to you yet, you're lucky. So on the one hand, agree, you're both trying to build something together, but most likely you're both off in your corner figuring out how to contribute your part.
I do think some of the loneliest parts of creation are when you see something no one else does and you can't really explain it without building it first. The amount of effort and energy required to do that is higher than normal and the fear that it could backfire weighs on you.
- wpietri 4y agoSoftware can be like that, but it doesn't have to be. I've been part of teams where we built entire products with pairing, frequent pair rotation, and cross-functional teams. Loneliness is a choice we have made, but I don't think it's a very good one.
- flockonus 4y agoWell, to be fair, both you and the author fall for the same mistake: conflating what works your you/them, in your/their context, with what's generally good / bad.
- wpietri 4y agoOh? Where exactly did I do that?
- flockonus 4y agore: > Loneliness is a choice we have made, but I don't think it's a very good one. It can be a good choice for particular situations (like the author seems to think of), perhaps some situations call for a balance of alone vs. social. Your original post makes a good case for specific solutions to specific situations (upvoted), but then as usual, the typical root of disagreements are poorly scoped comments.
- xmprt 4y agoI read that more along the lines that loneliness is a choice we made but the fact that we've chosen isn't good. Not that alternatives to loneliness are better but rather that we shouldn't drive people towards specific styles of creativity through the workflows that the software development industry has developed (eg. Agile, SCRUM, etc.)
- wpietri 4y agoIf people are feeling deeply lonely in their collaborative work, it sounds to me like it's not working for them. Ditto "where someone comes in and clobbers code you've just committed and then there's merge conflicts and wasted effort trying to understand". Unless you're going to ague those things are good, then no, I don't think I'm conflating anything. I'm taking what people are already saying is bad and saying there are solutions for that.
- Aeolun 4y ago> I've been part of teams where we built entire products with pairing, frequent pair rotation To be honest, that sounds terrible to me. I can’t think when someone is constantly looking over my shoulder. Maybe if you get candidates that do great at whiteboard interviews, you’d have a lot of success when pairing too?
- wpietri 4y agoYeah, many things people haven't tried can sound terrible to them. But it turns out the experience of collaboration is not in fact "someone is constantly looking over my shoulder". Pairing may not be for you, and like any collaboration it takes time to learn to do well. Honestly, I think whiteboard interviews are terrible. And pairing interviews can be a challenge to run, which is why I go way out of my way to make people feel comfortable in them. But done right, I think they are no worse than any other kind of interview, which inevitably puts people on the spot. And for many it's better, because coding is way more their strong suit than answering vague questions about their history and character.