3 ms·
I have a problem with that essay. It makes good points, most of which I agree with, but Raymond states them as values to be learned without explaining why. He e
by unalone 18y ago
I have a problem with that essay. It makes good points, most of which I agree with, but Raymond states them as values to be learned without explaining why. He essentially states his own beliefs without giving reason for some of them or explaining why such mindsets are useful. (Or: he shows rather than tells.)
The phrase that stands out most upon first glance is this:
Similarly, to be a hacker you have to get a basic thrill from solving problems, sharpening your skills, and exercising your intelligence.
If you aren't the kind of person that feels this way naturally, you'll need to become one in order to make it as a hacker. Otherwise you'll find your hacking energy is sapped by distractions like sex, money, and social approval.
I've found this not to be the case. Wanting sex, money, and social approval is not necessarily detrimental. Similarly, I get no thrill from solving problems per se. I don't think that that thrill is a necessity for hackers. Raymond uses too broad a brush.
- cschep 18y agoWhat is your connection to the hacker culture, if not problem solving?
- unalone 18y agoFrom some lens, my approach could be seen as problem solving. I've always viewed it as more of a creative art: I view the things I create as concepts. "What would happen if a web site worked like this, for instance, then I create every to revolve around that central theme. Some of the stuff I do is geared at problems, but I feel that viewing mistakes as bugs is a very sterile approach and I hate it. I don't have a lot of the traits that go alongside hackers, either. Coding languages don't fascinate me, by-and-large. When I look at a language, I figure out exactly how to get things done and then I don't look at it again. As a result, I don't find much fascination in discussions about programming, which is rare among hackers.
- ram1024 18y agoStephenson categorized techies into two sub-categories. The forger and the honer. the forger would create new tech, and then abandon it to pursue the next new thing. the honer would forever dabble in non-start tech, envisioning and forcing it to do wildly inventive things that the creator never envisioned. perhaps you two are simply two sides of the same coin.
- Zev 18y agoMessing around with things, figuring out how they work and making them do something I want them to do. It's interesting to me. Doesn't really solve any practical problem though.