3 ms·

If writing is only a means to an end and it's wrong to identify as being a writer, why shouldn't the same analogy apply to programming? I've taken an excerpt f

by ssivark 13y ago

If writing is only a means to an end and it's wrong to identify as being a writer, why shouldn't the same analogy apply to programming? I've taken an excerpt from the article and replaced certain words with analogous words related to programming: "The problem is identifying as a [programmer]. As though assembling [code] together is somehow its own activity. It isn’t. It’s a means to an end. And that end is always to [create] something..." Advice given to people who want to pursue programming versus pursuing writing seems really different. 1. Why is that the case, and why are the two not quite analogous? 2. Is it just the bias of our perspective, as the "techie" people?

logn 13y ago
He points out, part of the reason his advice holds is that getting published isn't hard. And also that readers enjoy anything written, regardless of its writing style, as long as it's a good read. The same isn't true for programming. Getting 'published' requires getting a compiler to agree to run your code, getting peers willing to work with you, and finding a company which thinks you should be hired (or starting your own). And computer users won't accept buggy programs, even though they may accept poor grammar. Also, the industry is perfectly happy to tell programmers exactly what programs to write and pays them well. In effect, being a "writer" isn't that great of a goal because writing (in itself) for readers isn't that hard--it's hard finding something worth saying. Programming is hard and most programmers write for companies who already have an audience. edit: Maybe a better analogy to this article is not to programmers, but to startup founders. Don't set out to be a founder, set out to make something people want, and to do that requires a little bit of life experience too.

3 ms·

If writing is only a means to an end and it's wrong to identify as being a writer, why shouldn't the same analogy apply to programming? I've taken an excerpt f

by ssivark 13y ago

logn 13y ago
He points out, part of the reason his advice holds is that getting published isn't hard. And also that readers enjoy anything written, regardless of its writing style, as long as it's a good read. The same isn't true for programming. Getting 'published' requires getting a compiler to agree to run your code, getting peers willing to work with you, and finding a company which thinks you should be hired (or starting your own). And computer users won't accept buggy programs, even though they may accept poor grammar. Also, the industry is perfectly happy to tell programmers exactly what programs to write and pays them well. In effect, being a "writer" isn't that great of a goal because writing (in itself) for readers isn't that hard--it's hard finding something worth saying. Programming is hard and most programmers write for companies who already have an audience. edit: Maybe a better analogy to this article is not to programmers, but to startup founders. Don't set out to be a founder, set out to make something people want, and to do that requires a little bit of life experience too.