6 ms·

Every time a popular opinion blog comes around that has an opposing opinion come out, I always wonder if these archetypes do actually help to advance the field

by TheBiv 11y ago

Every time a popular opinion blog comes around that has an opposing opinion come out, I always wonder if these archetypes do actually help to advance the field they're talking about. Meaning, I do actually find it helpful to read about how people are defining their value while performing their skill. Does anyone else find these opposing opinions helpful or do you just see them as wasteful drivel? Granted, this is just a blog post, so the author isn't probably isn't actively trying to craft a faction amongst front end developers.

sanderjd 11y ago
I'm glad you brought this up. I think it is generally difficult to come up with enough value on top of "hmm, this is a thought-provoking conversation and I'm glad it is being discussed" to be worth commenting, so comments vehemently agreeing or disagreeing end up being more common, and it is tempting to view the distribution of comments as being representative of the distribution of viewpoints. In reality, I suspect most people are like you (and me), and find that reading different viewpoints on a subject helps them solidify their own thoughts. So yeah, I'm at least with you on finding this particular conversation useful and not at all wasteful drivel.
lmm 11y ago
I find it useful. Individuals are very bad at being balanced. Seeing two opposed viewpoints and weighing them up for myself gives me a better basis for making decisions.
- chavesn 11y ago
  Indeed, some the most beneficial exchanges to observe are outright arguments.[1] When no one disagrees, no idea is truly tested. This reminds me of pg's "What you can't say" essay[2]. We may be able to identify areas we are wrong by evaluating the topics on which we are most unlikely to allow dissent. [1]: http://i.imgur.com/akfcNkJ.gif http://i.imgur.com/akfcNkJ.gif [2]: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
- nostrademons 11y ago
  Nah, some individuals are pretty good at being balanced. Such individuals are unremarkable and not very vocal, and so you never pay attention to them on the Internet. If you want balance, you need to seek it out, both consciously asking people with measured responses what they mean and discounting people who hold extreme viewpoints.
jos 11y ago
Nice insight, TheBiv. I feel I keep seeing an increasing number of blog posts that can be summarized as one of the following: - Programming language X is dead/dumb/old/verbose, program in my own personal language Y. - The [interpreter/compiler] for language Y is written in the source language, how "meta" is that? - The library that will change the industry, and I just wrote it! <showcases a 5-10 line wrapper around a native language feature> - I just invented this programming technique! <The technique has been in use since the early days of C> Ultimately, I think it's the intention of those individuals to establish themselves in their selected niche -- and there's no problem with that, we all have to make a living. With social media and the associated disconnects, there seems to be a continuous drive to have one's voice/opinion be heard. In my own experience, I find the number of opinions floating around (either opposing or not) to simply increase the overall noise of the internet, especially those that assert their opinion on the reader. Consequently, this discourages me from sharing my own neutral insights on existing language features, technologies, or simply something new I learned. On the note of establishing oneself, I believe the most effective method of doing so is the ability to showcase what one has accomplished, not just what one has said. Software development, companies, projects; the one purpose these three share in common is to solve the problems we're faced with. Whether that problem is solved with a game to satisfy one's boredom waiting at a bus stop, a usable ui design for booking flights, or writing a program that will take images of far off space bodies is beside the point -- the solutions we create will define our professional careers.
49531 11y ago
I've worked with teams that would read things like this and really take it to heart, while I've been part of teams that don't bother with it. Let's just say the latter of the two is much better to work with. It seems like very legitimate, high preforming, teams aren't really drawn to things like this. In some ways they're BFED and in some they're CFED.

by TheBiv 11y ago

sanderjd 11y ago

I'm glad you brought this up. I think it is generally difficult to come up with enough value on top of "hmm, this is a thought-provoking conversation and I'm glad it is being discussed" to be worth commenting, so comments vehemently agreeing or disagreeing end up being more common, and it is tempting to view the distribution of comments as being representative of the distribution of viewpoints. In reality, I suspect most people are like you (and me), and find that reading different viewpoints on a subject helps them solidify their own thoughts. So yeah, I'm at least with you on finding this particular conversation useful and not at all wasteful drivel.

lmm 11y ago

I find it useful. Individuals are very bad at being balanced. Seeing two opposed viewpoints and weighing them up for myself gives me a better basis for making decisions.

chavesn 11y ago
Indeed, some the most beneficial exchanges to observe are outright arguments.[1] When no one disagrees, no idea is truly tested. This reminds me of pg's "What you can't say" essay[2]. We may be able to identify areas we are wrong by evaluating the topics on which we are most unlikely to allow dissent. [1]: http://i.imgur.com/akfcNkJ.gif http://i.imgur.com/akfcNkJ.gif [2]: http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html
nostrademons 11y ago
Nah, some individuals are pretty good at being balanced. Such individuals are unremarkable and not very vocal, and so you never pay attention to them on the Internet. If you want balance, you need to seek it out, both consciously asking people with measured responses what they mean and discounting people who hold extreme viewpoints.

jos 11y ago

Nice insight, TheBiv. I feel I keep seeing an increasing number of blog posts that can be summarized as one of the following: - Programming language X is dead/dumb/old/verbose, program in my own personal language Y. - The [interpreter/compiler] for language Y is written in the source language, how "meta" is that? - The library that will change the industry, and I just wrote it! <showcases a 5-10 line wrapper around a native language feature> - I just invented this programming technique! <The technique has been in use since the early days of C> Ultimately, I think it's the intention of those individuals to establish themselves in their selected niche -- and there's no problem with that, we all have to make a living. With social media and the associated disconnects, there seems to be a continuous drive to have one's voice/opinion be heard. In my own experience, I find the number of opinions floating around (either opposing or not) to simply increase the overall noise of the internet, especially those that assert their opinion on the reader. Consequently, this discourages me from sharing my own neutral insights on existing language features, technologies, or simply something new I learned. On the note of establishing oneself, I believe the most effective method of doing so is the ability to showcase what one has accomplished, not just what one has said. Software development, companies, projects; the one purpose these three share in common is to solve the problems we're faced with. Whether that problem is solved with a game to satisfy one's boredom waiting at a bus stop, a usable ui design for booking flights, or writing a program that will take images of far off space bodies is beside the point -- the solutions we create will define our professional careers.

49531 11y ago

I've worked with teams that would read things like this and really take it to heart, while I've been part of teams that don't bother with it. Let's just say the latter of the two is much better to work with. It seems like very legitimate, high preforming, teams aren't really drawn to things like this. In some ways they're BFED and in some they're CFED.