3 ms·

Another article by a non-practitioner of Lisp trying to harm Lisp people. Because we are few in number, it's hard to defend against, and harmful. It is not ea

Another article by a non-practitioner of Lisp trying to harm Lisp people. Because we are few in number, it's hard to defend against, and harmful. It is not easy to write your own libraries in Lisp. You're not going to write your own cryptography, web serving, database access, regular expressions and whatnot, and if so, not to the level of quality of available libraries. People developing applications in Lisp use libraries.

ironmagma 2y ago
First, I'm not a non-practitioner of Lisp, I've written a fair amount of it. And more importantly, the article isn't about any programming language. Further, I have heard this phenomenon bolstered by heavy Lisp users IRL and Eric Normand who hosts LispCast. It's insane to me that you would think this is written to harm Lisp users, as I love the community and the languages. My point is something that applies to every (other) language, and it's a point about fragmentation. If you use packages in your favorite language, that's great, and not who I'm talking to.
- kazinator 2y ago
  > written to harm Lisp users Who cares what is the intent or not if all that remains is the effect at the end of the day.
  - ironmagma 2y ago
    How is that the effect? The maximum extent of damage, if any, is referencing an already-widely-referenced text. I'm not attacking anyone, or anything, aside from the concept of dependency avoidance. Honestly, having a curse named after you makes you cool in my book, at least when you adopt the "no publicity is bad publicity" outlook. Especially when the core critique is that the curse is that the language is too powerful.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    - fredrikholm 2y ago
      > [Wikipedia] Network effects are typically positive feedback systems, resulting in users deriving more and more value from a product as more users join the same network. > [Your article] (Lisps) is essentially immune to the network effect. You're making a strong inverse argument of "nobody got fired for using Java" against Lisp specifically.
      - ironmagma 2y ago
        Would that be “nobody got hired for using Lisp”? Because based on the number of Lisp job postings...
        fredrikholm 2y ago
        I don't necessarily disagree with you; merely pointing out that you simultaneously say that you aren't out to dig at Lisp and then reply by sarcastically digging at Lisp.
        ironmagma 2y ago
        It’s more of a dark dig at the job market. Fewer users isn’t worse, but it is fewer users.
jimbokun 2y ago
Can we please refrain from the modern definition of “harm” to mean “I feel bad when people disagree with me”? If you feel harmed when encountering opinions and arguments different from your own, that’s something you need to work on personally, not the responsibility of other people.
- kazinator 2y ago
  What you're saying is well and good. People in online forums should grow thick skins or else stay out and all that. I'm talking about actual economic harm here, though. Decision makers in organizations being influenced by made up articles that trash-talk Lisp people, resulting in reduced opportunities in that area.

ironmagma 2y ago

First, I'm not a non-practitioner of Lisp, I've written a fair amount of it. And more importantly, the article isn't about any programming language. Further, I have heard this phenomenon bolstered by heavy Lisp users IRL and Eric Normand who hosts LispCast. It's insane to me that you would think this is written to harm Lisp users, as I love the community and the languages. My point is something that applies to every (other) language, and it's a point about fragmentation. If you use packages in your favorite language, that's great, and not who I'm talking to.

kazinator 2y ago
> written to harm Lisp users Who cares what is the intent or not if all that remains is the effect at the end of the day.
- ironmagma 2y ago
  How is that the effect? The maximum extent of damage, if any, is referencing an already-widely-referenced text. I'm not attacking anyone, or anything, aside from the concept of dependency avoidance. Honestly, having a curse named after you makes you cool in my book, at least when you adopt the "no publicity is bad publicity" outlook. Especially when the core critique is that the curse is that the language is too powerful.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  - fredrikholm 2y ago
    > [Wikipedia] Network effects are typically positive feedback systems, resulting in users deriving more and more value from a product as more users join the same network. > [Your article] (Lisps) is essentially immune to the network effect. You're making a strong inverse argument of "nobody got fired for using Java" against Lisp specifically.
    - ironmagma 2y ago
      Would that be “nobody got hired for using Lisp”? Because based on the number of Lisp job postings...
      - fredrikholm 2y ago
        I don't necessarily disagree with you; merely pointing out that you simultaneously say that you aren't out to dig at Lisp and then reply by sarcastically digging at Lisp.
        ironmagma 2y ago
        It’s more of a dark dig at the job market. Fewer users isn’t worse, but it is fewer users.

jimbokun 2y ago

Can we please refrain from the modern definition of “harm” to mean “I feel bad when people disagree with me”? If you feel harmed when encountering opinions and arguments different from your own, that’s something you need to work on personally, not the responsibility of other people.

kazinator 2y ago
What you're saying is well and good. People in online forums should grow thick skins or else stay out and all that. I'm talking about actual economic harm here, though. Decision makers in organizations being influenced by made up articles that trash-talk Lisp people, resulting in reduced opportunities in that area.