3 ms·
Thanks - I really appreciate the feedback. In my mind, I had meant "Hickeysian" in a tongue-in-cheek way, and I had considered jokingly mentioning that the post
by nonrecursive 14y ago
Thanks - I really appreciate the feedback. In my mind, I had meant "Hickeysian" in a tongue-in-cheek way, and I had considered jokingly mentioning that the post was a kind of hagiography. Now I really see how this could appear to someone else, and I have to admit this realization has made me shudder a little myself. This will definitely help my writing.
As for cataloging his unique viewpoint - hopefully as I progress I'll do a better job. I think that some of his later talks like "The value of values" and the one on place may be more uniquely his.
- plinkplonk 14y agoGreat, I look forward to your future posts. I suspect the way to 'thinking like Rich Hickey' (vs specific ideas etc) goes, at least partly, through Polya's "How to Solve It". He seemed to be very influenced by it ( I forget which talk he mentioned it in).
- kinleyd 14y agoJust wanted to note that, if I'm not mistaken, your reference to "accidental complexity" should be "incidental complexity". Nice post. A Rich Hickey groupie here as well - like you I love his talks for their mind widening value.
- nonrecursive 14y agoThat's something I wasn't 100% sure about. When "incidental complexity" was discussed in the talk, I thought it was pretty much the same as "accidental complexity" in the way that Fred Brooks means it in No Silver Bullet. So I used "accidental complexity" and linked to the wikipedia article to hopefully provide some useful info.
- wonderzombie 14y agoThere is also Out of the Tarpit[1], which also uses "accidental." This is a paper Rich Hickey mentions in at least one of his talks. [1]: http://shaffner.us/cs/papers/tarpit.pdf http://shaffner.us/cs/papers/tarpit.pdf