4 ms·

As much as I like pg's writings (honestly, I (usually) (kinda) like/appreciate his writing style, content, etc.), re: hackers&painters, obligatory link to Macie

by wfn 12y ago

As much as I like pg's writings (honestly, I (usually) (kinda) like/appreciate his writing style, content, etc.), re: hackers&painters, obligatory link to Maciej's retort/comments "Smushing Paul Graham": http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm http://idlewords.com/2005/04/dabblers_and_blowhards.htm It's a very nice read, actually. (You might remember Maciej from "The Internet With A Human Face"[1] / as the dude behind pinboard.in / etc.) [1]: http://idlewords.com/bt14.htm http://idlewords.com/bt14.htm

thegeomaster 12y ago
I'd actually argue that an analogy with architecture is a much stronger one than the one with painting. In both architecture and hacking, the creative output has to hold up to some objective standards (to compile, run and solve the problem/to adhere to the laws of physics and provide a purpose) but it also allows degrees of freedom not commonly thought about when one thinks of architecture or coding. This is, of course, implying that an architect is also capable of "implementing" his solution (which should, strictly speaking, be an engineer's job), but you could also argue that you can devise a system where a hacker would write a functional prototype and then a software engineer would reimplement it rigorously, with specs, TDD or whatsoever. This is where the analogy starts being a little far fetched so I admit it's not the best one but I feel like an architect's thought process follows very closely a hacker's one. Maciej's text is very nice, and I must say I'm stretched between PG's original text and this one right now. I guess I just to need it a little more thought and reread both of them :) On a side note, I sometimes think about whether programming is really "just engineering" and if I'm just being delusional and just eager to call myself an "artist" because I love hacking. It's an interesting subject to ponder about, but I can't say I've made up my mind.

by wfn 12y ago

thegeomaster 12y ago

I'd actually argue that an analogy with architecture is a much stronger one than the one with painting. In both architecture and hacking, the creative output has to hold up to some objective standards (to compile, run and solve the problem/to adhere to the laws of physics and provide a purpose) but it also allows degrees of freedom not commonly thought about when one thinks of architecture or coding. This is, of course, implying that an architect is also capable of "implementing" his solution (which should, strictly speaking, be an engineer's job), but you could also argue that you can devise a system where a hacker would write a functional prototype and then a software engineer would reimplement it rigorously, with specs, TDD or whatsoever. This is where the analogy starts being a little far fetched so I admit it's not the best one but I feel like an architect's thought process follows very closely a hacker's one. Maciej's text is very nice, and I must say I'm stretched between PG's original text and this one right now. I guess I just to need it a little more thought and reread both of them :) On a side note, I sometimes think about whether programming is really "just engineering" and if I'm just being delusional and just eager to call myself an "artist" because I love hacking. It's an interesting subject to ponder about, but I can't say I've made up my mind.