6 ms·

^ (IV) | (I) | People | People everyone | everyone | wants to work n | feels bad | with i | for | c

fpgeek 14y ago
It's worth noting that the borders between these categories aren't simple vertical and horizontal lines. Within limits, the more talent you have, the less niceness you can get away with. In other words, the line between (I) and (II) slopes down. The line between (IV) and (I) (and between (II) and (III), for that matter) might also slope down, but that's complicated by the talent threshold being more important, I believe.
- saraid216 14y ago
  There isn't a claim that the points that would represent various people would be equally distributed among the four boxes. The more detail you add, the more evidence you have to provide.
- numeromancer 14y ago
  Within limits, the more talent you have, the less niceness you can get away with. This misreads the situation a little, I think. The more talented you are, the more likely you are to recognize the value of “niceness” (in its current meaning (“kind”) and its older meaning (“careful and particular”)). That's why someone whose code is well-commented and carefully designed has shown more talent than the arrogant trickster whose 2k-line functions full of 1-letter variable names “comment themselves”.
rjzzleep 14y ago
it's a common misconception to think that the greatest things come from people that tolerate or like each other. a lot actually come from really "harsh" rivalries, which are everything but nice. equally so in the offline world.
- davedx 14y ago
  Examples?
  - ciupicri 14y ago
    It might not be a very good example, but OpenBSD appeared after Theo de Raadt had a fight with the NetBSD team. By the way OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project.
  - rjzzleep 14y ago
    linux? ffmpeg? those two are that good because a bunch of really smart people keep clashing with each other. what about x.org? there was something about keith packard getting his commit access to x11r6 revoked after not properly following release freeze procedures. if you want to get some entertainment you should probably grab a bag of popcorn and watch the discussions on mplayer or another commit list. peoples commits with get ripped apart and spit on. and what's the result? a project that has it's code running on tens/hundreds of million devices without a proper release structure. now for real life examples, i only distinctly remember, but if i remember correctly a lot of the so called innovators in the 19th-20th weren't really the biggest friends. they still insulted one another, they just had other words. we all know tesla and edison weren't the best friends(although edison wasn't really an innovator, but anyway) what about the physics community? whenever someone comes out with something revolutionary new he will get ripped apart. oh and how about economics where theres a bunch of different groups constantly at fight with each other. but no real solution coming out because the predominant neoliberalism party suppresses the others? <-- see these guys have a real problem precisely because there is not enough people that just say what they want and still get heard, because what they say is right. although the internet again changes the dynamics a little bit. i could go on like that bunny in the duracell commercial, but i think i'll leave it at those. you think conflicts are bad? think again. what happens when you freeze a cola bottle? it usually explodes.
- unalone 14y ago
  That's a simplification that might lead you to a mistaken conclusion. Some creative sorts thrive on strife, it's true; and these sorts look for people who operate the same way so they can thrust themselves at one another, grow heated, and still get work done. That is not the only way things get done, it is not an inescapable approach (many people use that as an excuse to avoid acting like grown-ups), and, most importantly, there is a time and a place for that and it's not at the center of an open community. Look, the idea of open source is this glorious idea that when people work together they can achieve things which no one person would have thought of on their own. My favorite open source works are the result of somebody having a crazy idea, getting support from various open source projects, and making something they'd have never made on their own. Having the sorts of misanthropic terrors that this guy's writing about in positions where they can alienate other participants undermines one of the clearest values of open source work. What's more, the Internet SUCKS at strife. Arguing is one thing where you can see and hear and intuit the person you're arguing with. You stay in lockstep with them, even if you're fighting them bitterly. Arguments on the Internet are much more commonly the result of people simply not understanding tone, or even who the shit's on the other side. They are rarely productive in the way you mean. When you've got an issue OF community bullying, they are practically never productive. If one person feels the need to start fight with masses of people, even if it's because they don't "understand" him, that person is pretty much in the wrong, and ruining things for those other people. To be honest it makes me sad that programmers and computer geeks, who are both smart enough and used enough to being ostracized and belittled, so often decide that the problem with their former persecution was simply that they weren't the ones getting to do the persecuting. And the strain of celebrity-worship that leads to other coders excusing the worst behavior simply because it comes from a well-known name is equally disappointing. We're not as different from mainstream culture as it's fun to pretend.
nollidge 14y ago
Reminds me of one part of Neil Gaiman's recent commencement speech [0] that's been meming its way around: People keep working, in a freelance world (and more and more of today’s world is freelance) because their work is good, and because they are easy to get along with, and because they deliver the work on time. And you don’t even need all three. Two out of three is fine. People will tolerate how unpleasant you are if your work is good and you deliver it on time. They’ll forgive the lateness of the work if it’s good, and if they like you. And you don’t have to be as good as the others if you’re on time and it’s always a pleasure to hear from you. [0] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/21/neil-gaiman-commencement-speech_n_1534005.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/21/neil-gaiman-commenc...

fpgeek 14y ago

It's worth noting that the borders between these categories aren't simple vertical and horizontal lines. Within limits, the more talent you have, the less niceness you can get away with. In other words, the line between (I) and (II) slopes down. The line between (IV) and (I) (and between (II) and (III), for that matter) might also slope down, but that's complicated by the talent threshold being more important, I believe.

saraid216 14y ago
There isn't a claim that the points that would represent various people would be equally distributed among the four boxes. The more detail you add, the more evidence you have to provide.
numeromancer 14y ago
Within limits, the more talent you have, the less niceness you can get away with. This misreads the situation a little, I think. The more talented you are, the more likely you are to recognize the value of “niceness” (in its current meaning (“kind”) and its older meaning (“careful and particular”)). That's why someone whose code is well-commented and carefully designed has shown more talent than the arrogant trickster whose 2k-line functions full of 1-letter variable names “comment themselves”.

rjzzleep 14y ago

it's a common misconception to think that the greatest things come from people that tolerate or like each other. a lot actually come from really "harsh" rivalries, which are everything but nice. equally so in the offline world.

davedx 14y ago
Examples?
- ciupicri 14y ago
  It might not be a very good example, but OpenBSD appeared after Theo de Raadt had a fight with the NetBSD team. By the way OpenSSH is developed by the OpenBSD Project.
- rjzzleep 14y ago
  linux? ffmpeg? those two are that good because a bunch of really smart people keep clashing with each other. what about x.org? there was something about keith packard getting his commit access to x11r6 revoked after not properly following release freeze procedures. if you want to get some entertainment you should probably grab a bag of popcorn and watch the discussions on mplayer or another commit list. peoples commits with get ripped apart and spit on. and what's the result? a project that has it's code running on tens/hundreds of million devices without a proper release structure. now for real life examples, i only distinctly remember, but if i remember correctly a lot of the so called innovators in the 19th-20th weren't really the biggest friends. they still insulted one another, they just had other words. we all know tesla and edison weren't the best friends(although edison wasn't really an innovator, but anyway) what about the physics community? whenever someone comes out with something revolutionary new he will get ripped apart. oh and how about economics where theres a bunch of different groups constantly at fight with each other. but no real solution coming out because the predominant neoliberalism party suppresses the others? <-- see these guys have a real problem precisely because there is not enough people that just say what they want and still get heard, because what they say is right. although the internet again changes the dynamics a little bit. i could go on like that bunny in the duracell commercial, but i think i'll leave it at those. you think conflicts are bad? think again. what happens when you freeze a cola bottle? it usually explodes.
unalone 14y ago
That's a simplification that might lead you to a mistaken conclusion. Some creative sorts thrive on strife, it's true; and these sorts look for people who operate the same way so they can thrust themselves at one another, grow heated, and still get work done. That is not the only way things get done, it is not an inescapable approach (many people use that as an excuse to avoid acting like grown-ups), and, most importantly, there is a time and a place for that and it's not at the center of an open community. Look, the idea of open source is this glorious idea that when people work together they can achieve things which no one person would have thought of on their own. My favorite open source works are the result of somebody having a crazy idea, getting support from various open source projects, and making something they'd have never made on their own. Having the sorts of misanthropic terrors that this guy's writing about in positions where they can alienate other participants undermines one of the clearest values of open source work. What's more, the Internet SUCKS at strife. Arguing is one thing where you can see and hear and intuit the person you're arguing with. You stay in lockstep with them, even if you're fighting them bitterly. Arguments on the Internet are much more commonly the result of people simply not understanding tone, or even who the shit's on the other side. They are rarely productive in the way you mean. When you've got an issue OF community bullying, they are practically never productive. If one person feels the need to start fight with masses of people, even if it's because they don't "understand" him, that person is pretty much in the wrong, and ruining things for those other people. To be honest it makes me sad that programmers and computer geeks, who are both smart enough and used enough to being ostracized and belittled, so often decide that the problem with their former persecution was simply that they weren't the ones getting to do the persecuting. And the strain of celebrity-worship that leads to other coders excusing the worst behavior simply because it comes from a well-known name is equally disappointing. We're not as different from mainstream culture as it's fun to pretend.

nollidge 14y ago

Reminds me of one part of Neil Gaiman's recent commencement speech [0] that's been meming its way around: People keep working, in a freelance world (and more and more of today’s world is freelance) because their work is good, and because they are easy to get along with, and because they deliver the work on time. And you don’t even need all three. Two out of three is fine. People will tolerate how unpleasant you are if your work is good and you deliver it on time. They’ll forgive the lateness of the work if it’s good, and if they like you. And you don’t have to be as good as the others if you’re on time and it’s always a pleasure to hear from you. [0] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/21/neil-gaiman-commencement-speech_n_1534005.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/21/neil-gaiman-commenc...