4 ms·

> "Newest technologies" are for early adopters and hype suckers. This definitely doesn't come off as "positive and a negative". By grouping them together (and

> "Newest technologies" are for early adopters and hype suckers. This definitely doesn't come off as "positive and a negative". By grouping them together (and casting them as an "other") you are devaluing them.

coldtea 3y ago
You wrote about me deriding bald people in this thread (telling me it's bad "to deride people who have no hair"). My response above was about that: that I did no such thing. I mentioned bald people vs people with hair as an example of a sorites ("no clear boundaries") problem. Not to cluster them with hype-promoting developers (that doesn't even make sense). As for the others types that you mention, sure: the very purpose of the original comment was to deride people promoting hype.
- ironmagma 3y ago
  It's impressive the lengths you'll go to avoid seeing the point. My message is, don't write off people just because they appear to be hipsters. Similar to people lacking hair, who are oftentimes the SAME persons as those people having hair, the developers participating in new technologies are often the same as the ones writing in mature codebases.
  - coldtea 3y ago
    The "hair' argument becaome so convoluted I don't even know where to address, so let's address your main concern. Are we allowed to write off people's activity for any reason? Dislike certain trends people follow? Criticize some tendencies or bad habbits? If so, I chose to criticize hype-merchants and write them off (regarding that aspect of their life, I'm sure they could still be wonderful parents, or golf players, or whatever otherwise).
    - ironmagma 3y ago
      That is what happens when you bring up unrelated topics like hair in a discussion about developers. The question is, write them off as what? Because as we already established, it requires developers in order to make a technology “mature.” So how does it make sense to write those developers off, when they are necessary to the creation of the thing you want?
      - coldtea 3y ago
        I don't find that the process of making a technology mature is the same as it's mass adoption as the hyped new thing. If anything, the latter leads to the opposite: tons of immature technologies, hyped to high heaven, used by tons of developers who don't know any better, and then discarded as a new shiny thing comes along. Discarded both by users, and their limited-attention-span creators.

coldtea 3y ago

You wrote about me deriding bald people in this thread (telling me it's bad "to deride people who have no hair"). My response above was about that: that I did no such thing. I mentioned bald people vs people with hair as an example of a sorites ("no clear boundaries") problem. Not to cluster them with hype-promoting developers (that doesn't even make sense). As for the others types that you mention, sure: the very purpose of the original comment was to deride people promoting hype.

ironmagma 3y ago
It's impressive the lengths you'll go to avoid seeing the point. My message is, don't write off people just because they appear to be hipsters. Similar to people lacking hair, who are oftentimes the SAME persons as those people having hair, the developers participating in new technologies are often the same as the ones writing in mature codebases.
- coldtea 3y ago
  The "hair' argument becaome so convoluted I don't even know where to address, so let's address your main concern. Are we allowed to write off people's activity for any reason? Dislike certain trends people follow? Criticize some tendencies or bad habbits? If so, I chose to criticize hype-merchants and write them off (regarding that aspect of their life, I'm sure they could still be wonderful parents, or golf players, or whatever otherwise).
  - ironmagma 3y ago
    That is what happens when you bring up unrelated topics like hair in a discussion about developers. The question is, write them off as what? Because as we already established, it requires developers in order to make a technology “mature.” So how does it make sense to write those developers off, when they are necessary to the creation of the thing you want?
    - coldtea 3y ago
      I don't find that the process of making a technology mature is the same as it's mass adoption as the hyped new thing. If anything, the latter leads to the opposite: tons of immature technologies, hyped to high heaven, used by tons of developers who don't know any better, and then discarded as a new shiny thing comes along. Discarded both by users, and their limited-attention-span creators.