Strong Opinions, Weakly Held

blog
101

“Regardless, you absolutely should question everything I write here”

^-- I think that’s the Key point here. Just because Jeff Atwood says that XML is not optimum, it does not mean that is is not optimum. Just because Joel Spolsky says that development teams should work without politics, it does not mean that all development teams should work without politics. Just because Raymond Chen says that Vietnamese sandwiches, aka bnh m are good, it does not mean that you have to like them.

Too many people are trying to be like other people and take stuff for granted. If Raymond Chen writes tomorrow “The world is flat”, quite a few people would believe it without hesitation.

This game always has two players: The one who is the “leader” - and the one who is following him blindly.

When I stubled across some of these blogs, I was in a similar situation. I first read Joel on Software, and I think he made the biggest impact on me since my parents. What he writes makes sense to me, being as inexperienced as I was some years back. But during the years and during making my own experiences, I have to say that I do not agree on everything. He is the guy who wants to sell stuff, which is of course perfectly fine. But that also means that his vision is somewhat limited to the commercial world - if I would like to learn something about the open Source world, I would not consult Joel.
From you, i learned how cool 3 24" Monitors are :slight_smile: and about some other concepts, but I do not agree with all that you write. Take your XML Posting as an example: I see your point, but I do not really care about it because I got another angle: My platform (.net 2.0) has working and well-tested XML Parsers and Writers built in. XML is not the best format for task X? Who cares as long as Parsing and Writing is so easy. If I would have to deal with environment where every byte of storage and traffic counts I might have another point of view.

That was just a long winded way to say: Blind Following means Doom. Question everything, regardless if it’s written by some undergraduate student, by someone who works in the industry for 20 years or even by God himself. Take whatever you can from these people but don’t blindly follow them.

Oh yes, and don’t believe that monkey p** about “You HAVE to know C”. No, you don’t and you never did in the past. You should know how the Processor and System works generally, how memory is accessed etc., but you can learn all that without wasting a second of your precious time on learning a language that does not even properly support strings. The only reason to learn C or C++ is if you have to write software in it.

102

Jeff, what’s important is not coming up with the right answer, but asking the right question.

What I see you doing is asking the questions that the rest of us wouldn’t think twice about. So keep it up.

103

Your Snake kung fu is great, Master, but I’ve been studying the secret Mongoose style for months. Prepare to fight!

104

Not all programmers are amateurs, read a books from Tom Miller about DirectX and think about the amateur statement again

105

Your blog entries are getting longer. Maybe shorter would be better. Though it depends on subject and patience / interest of the reader.

106

“Well, congratulations on resisting going right for the jugular in response. In the same situation I’d have attempted to bring him down in the same way, but then you’re better than that - something you no doubt know, considering your 75,000 subscriptions and 50,000 page daily page imprints.”

You are deluding yourself.

Jeff has two non-destructive options for dealing with credible criticism.

One is to simply ignore it, which is the approach most bloggers take, hoping that it’ll just blow over. The other is to lob softballs back, wearing velvet gloves, hoping to appear to be good natured and humble while diffusing the criticisms. Jeff chose the latter, as he frequently does. Personally it comes across as completely dishonest and fake.

107

Ohhhhh jeez. I read up to your link to his blog. I went to his blog, I started reading it, I came to this quote early on:

“A comment that software forking is “the very embodiment of freedom zero” demonstrates that Atwood has no idea what freedom zero is. Freedom zero is the freedom to run the software in question without modification …”

I thought, that doesn’t sound right. I googled gnu freedom zero. Clicked first link (GNU freedom 0 definition). ctrl-f modifica. “should be free to redistribute copies, either with or without modifications,” Ok. this guy is retarded. keep on keepin on Jeff.

108

You lost me when you recommended Idiocracy.

No, really.

109

Michael Stum wrote: “The only reason to learn C or C++ is if you have to write software in it”

I think that’s quite a sad statement. I started programming because I’m a curious person. I want to know stuff. Over the years, I’ve learned lots of languages (most voluntarily, some forced upon me while studying). I’ve yet to find even a single language which didn’t teach me something about programming.

And C certainly is a language which will teach you a lot. Learning C (or similar unmanaged languages) forces you to understand things about the hardware in your computer which you simply can’t grok by learning about how computers work in theory.

Some other languages which can teach you a lot: JavaScript (teaches you stuff like prototype-based object orientation and closures); Prolog (logic programming); some functional language (Erlang, Haskell or Scheme - I had to make do with ML :-); Objective-C (reference-counting memory management); Eiffel (for its pure object orientation, which includes stuff like multiple inheritance) or Oberon (just to see what they did to Pascal :slight_smile: - also, Bluebottle is quite an interesting system, with a zoomable interface and other neat stuff).

As a programmer, you should learn new languages regularly, because no matter what you use to write your daily code, learning new languages will make you a better programmer in your language of choice.

110

It’s funny how your critics state they will no longer read your blog, like if someone actually cared.

Personally, I love your blog. Keep up the good work.

111

@D: “Jeff has two non-destructive options for dealing with credible criticism.”

I'm afraid you've committed a fallacy of false alternatives here, however well made your point in the last paragraph is (true or not).  If you disagree with the post, you are certainly free to do so, and I would hope that everyone else here is as open to listening to a new idea as I am.  If your qualms with Jeff's logic are logical, then present us with the appropriate counter-logic.  If they are personal, then state them as they are.  It's damaging to the rest of your otherwise valid opinion, however, to masquerade an argument under the banner of a mis-constructed logical argument.

@Jeff:

Whether Rankine's criticisms are valid, he's taken your "intensity" out of context, he ignores the value of this comment section, or if he misunderstands your position entirely, or any combination of the above, I feel that your response was respectfully yet directly designed, and I respect that you DO take the time to respond to the reaction your writing creates every once in a while.

Cheers!

112

I thought, that doesn’t sound right

Your reading skills aren’t that great.

GNU lists 4 kinds of freedom, from freedom 0 to freedom 3 [right on that page](http://www.fsf.org/licensing/essays/free-sw.html). Maybe you should go back and look at each of the four points, noting that one of them is called “freedom 0”.

And I quote-

*  The freedom to run the program, for any purpose (freedom 0).
* The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs (freedom 1). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
* The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbor (freedom 2).
* The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits (freedom 3). Access to the source code is a precondition for this.
113

When I was in high school I had writing classes (I’m native portuguese speaking so I do not know how to translate this the way it’s meant to be). A dissertation about any given topic is about starting with a point (like “PHP sucks, and it does not matter”) and then you start discussing why and how. The best dissertation is the one where you get to a point that other people just can’t respond (which is impossible, but can get very close), even if they know that it’s wrong. Jeff, you know how to dissertate and that makes other people angry because they can’t properly respond to your points, even if they know that you are wrong.

114

Oh, and Napoelon Dynamite is not that great of a movie.

115

Jeff, I read your blog because I feel I can relate to alot you have to say (as an amateur). I’ve never considered you to be an expert programmer, but definitely an experienced one. You’ve been in the trenches for years, and, subsequently, your writing on the human factors is unique and always worth reading. Keep doing what you’re doing. People who don’t even know you should not critique your opinions based on their misconception of your credibility.

116

Is it just me or have there been a manor influx of comments latly.

117

First, I love coding horror.

Second, I’m quite surprised you responded to that posting. If I could take back that unique visit to his site, I would. It really wasn’t worth it.

-Kevin

118

I think this blog is great since there’s always something new here (Most of the time). I can’t see why anyone would criticize it. About the only problem I’ve had is I’ve had to look up a word every second entry I read on here, since language is used that I dont ussually see in most places.
Though, I expect that anywere, and dont care since learning new words is always a good thing.

119

Don’t listen to criticism like that, Jeff. You shouldn’t even bother with reading it…

I love your blog! Keep up the excellent work.

120

It just proves that reaching the masses by blogging is way harder than most people realize. If you pander to the people they accuse you of being entertainment, if not they just ignore you. Choosing is tough. If you really believe in what you are saying then you’ve picked the winning side.

It’s unfair, I think to confuse being a popular blogger with being an authority on software development. In a world were lots of our knowledge comes from professional writers contributing to industry magazines, popularity does not automatically equate to “declaring” oneself an authority. To write well is not an act of hubris. (and of course, being an authority in a fledgling discipline like software isn’t a particularly high bar to achieve anyways)

Paul.
http://theprogrammersparadox.blogspot.com