Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

_why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

smashingmagazine.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 183 posts

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#51

Post by jimbokun »

gdp wrote: post #24
antirez wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programming as science: not consistent with reality IMHO. My argument is that it's pretty simple to build a good computer scientist: take a guy with good IQ and put it into a good university. But there are zero guarantees that you'll end with a good coder also, as coding is a matter of taste, tradeoffs, design decisions, creativity, ability to think out of the box, and so forth. The problem is that most of our indust…

I don't consider programming to be a much greater skill than the ability to install fixed wiring in a house or balance a budget. Are small business accountants "artists"? Accordingly, programming is not _currently_ a science. However, I think that is a much better position to aspire to than self-aggrandizement and glorifying a skill that is really no different than any other skill that any suitably motivated 12 year…

"I don't consider programming to be a much greater skill than the ability to install fixed wiring in a house or balance a budget."

The vision you seem to be espousing is someone tells the programmer exactly what to do, and the programmer does it exactly to that specification. Wiring a house and balancing a budget are solved problems. So you seem to be saying that programming is also a solved problem.

Which is so out of touch with reality I feel that, surely, I must be misunderstanding you. A computer program can do pretty much anything. Depending how you feel about the equivalence of Turing machines and human brains, you can argue that a computer program can potentially do anything a person can do.

With the geometric increase of computing capacity available to us, how is it even conceivable that "programming" is equivalent to balancing a budget or wiring a house? You seem to suffer from an incredible lack of imagination.

"However, I think that is a much better position to aspire to than self-aggrandizement and glorifying a skill that is really no different than any other skill that any suitably motivated 12 year can acquire with a couple library books and an internet connection."

That is the same as saying a 12 year old can write or play a musical instrument. Sure, they can spell words and make sentences, or know the correct fingering for certain notes. But the potential for improvement in those endeavors is also unbounded. The same is true of programming, in my opinion.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#52

Post by jacquesm »

barrkel wrote: post #50
gdp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't consider programming to be a much greater skill than the ability to install fixed wiring in a house or balance a budget. Are small business accountants "artists"? Accordingly, programming is not _currently_ a science. However, I think that is a much better position to aspire to than self-aggrandizement and glorifying a skill that is really no different than any other skill that any suitably motivated 12 year…

Radically disagree with you there. Wiring is in principle really simple - make sure the right wires are connected, insulated properly with appropriate safeguards; accounting is similar, where there are essentially only four kinds of things. Putting together a large piece of software, or optimizing a particular path in a large codebase, or putting together a creative solution to a class of problems, requires a much hi…

Programming is in principle really simple - make sure the right lines of code are used, follow each other and are debugged properly.

Sure, putting together a large piece of software is hard, but then again, putting together the electrical system for a nuclear plant or something on that order of complexity is just as hard, if not harder (no 'undo' switch on that one).

There has to be a way to see that programming is really not that hard 'in principle'. It is hard in practice, and this goes for a large number of other activities as well.

To argue on a programming forum that programming in principle is a simple thing is probably an unpopular point of view, but really, we're not half-gods or somehow special, we're just bricklayers and watchmakers. And if you've never built a brick wall I challenge you to go and do it and afterwards we'll talk about how easy it was 'in principle'.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#53

Post by tokipin »

gdp wrote: post #16

Articles about _why on HN seem to always take on a particularly sycophantic quality. As a non-fan of Ruby, his contributions to programming outside of that community seem minimal. The ethic that people appear to ascribe to him ("programming as art") is precisely the opposite to that which I generally advocate ("programming as science"). I (and others) often suggest that the former approach is actually harmful to soft…

  INTJs : programming as science, maybe a little art
  INTPs : programming as equal parts science and art
this comes from the fundamental difference between left-brain and right-brain conception. namely, the right-brain folks can handle the tiny little details directly and simultaneously and account for them statistically. because of this, they can often rule out or rule in entire chains of reasoning in vast swaths and hone in on the critical parts quickly. this is what makes artists seem magical: out of countless possibilities, they can select the good ones

the left-brain folks cannot handle the little details directly. they rely on subconscious abstractions. for left-brain folks, the engineering aspect of coding is perhaps necessary to keep track of the little details. on the other hand, left-brain folks have a knack for certain kinds of structure (abstract logic for example) that right-brain folks do not have naturally

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#54

Post by jacquesm »

gdp wrote: post #16

Articles about _why on HN seem to always take on a particularly sycophantic quality. As a non-fan of Ruby, his contributions to programming outside of that community seem minimal. The ethic that people appear to ascribe to him ("programming as art") is precisely the opposite to that which I generally advocate ("programming as science"). I (and others) often suggest that the former approach is actually harmful to soft…

_why is essentially really good at marketing, and he did what all great marketeers do best, he kept the people wanting more.

The move to 'quit while ahead' is genius, forever his legacy will be treasured and the myth of his genius will only expand with time.

That doesn't mean that his contribution wasn't great, I'm sure the Ruby world would look different without him, but for every _Why there are 10 others, maybe not as good at marketing themselves but at least as influential.

We really have come to the crossroads of popular culture and programming if we get programmers with 'cult' status comparable to minor movie stars. But I'd rather see some credit go to those that are less capable self promotors.

Watch for _Why's spectacular comeback in a couple of years.

Mark my words.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#55

Post by jimbokun »

gdp wrote: post #28
davidalln wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think dismissing "programming as art" as irrelevant and hurtful to the community is dangerous. Here we have the tools to create a near-infinite amount of almost everything that can run on a computer. We use code to run complicated robots that can drive a course without human input, solve the most complicated mathematic problems of today, and create artificial intelligence with the ability to learn as it ages. Yet a…

I agree that computing as an activity has manifestations that could be understood to be art, but that doesn't make _programming_ art. Glorifying programming as an art is like glorifying spelling as salient to the quality of Shakespeare's plays. Programming is the act of expressing programs. Coming up with interesting things for those programs to do definitely follows a creative process of human inspiration, but actua…

I feel that you are going Humpty Dumpty on us, picking a meaning for "programming" that makes your point but is far a field of what the term "programming" means in the minds of practitioners.

Basically, you have defined programming as a form of dictation. That definition makes your arguments true. But it does not follow the common usage of this term, especially as a site like this.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#56

Post by starkfist »

jacquesm wrote: post #54
gdp wrote: post #16

Articles about _why on HN seem to always take on a particularly sycophantic quality. As a non-fan of Ruby, his contributions to programming outside of that community seem minimal. The ethic that people appear to ascribe to him ("programming as art") is precisely the opposite to that which I generally advocate ("programming as science"). I (and others) often suggest that the former approach is actually harmful to soft…

_why is essentially really good at marketing, and he did what all great marketeers do best, he kept the people wanting more. The move to 'quit while ahead' is genius, forever his legacy will be treasured and the myth of his genius will only expand with time. That doesn't mean that his contribution wasn't great, I'm sure the Ruby world would look different without him, but for every _Why there are 10 others, maybe not…

I'm not sure how he was a savvy self marketeer when nobody knew where he lived or what he did for a living or even what his real name was.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#57

Post by jacquesm »

nir wrote: post #7

It was a sad day when _why left programming. I always thought he was one of the most creative people currently working in any medium, and we were lucky to have him choose code to express his ideas. Does anyone have any idea what he's been doing since?

> I always thought he was one of the most creative people currently working in any medium,

You live a sheltered life.

A few million creative artists would probably disagree without you, some violently so.

Yes, it was nice to have him around, no, he's not that special. Have a look at Alan Kay for an example of someone who is special.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#58

Post by jacquesm »

starkfist wrote: post #56
jacquesm wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

_why is essentially really good at marketing, and he did what all great marketeers do best, he kept the people wanting more. The move to 'quit while ahead' is genius, forever his legacy will be treasured and the myth of his genius will only expand with time. That doesn't mean that his contribution wasn't great, I'm sure the Ruby world would look different without him, but for every _Why there are 10 others, maybe not…

I'm not sure how he was a savvy self marketeer when nobody knew where he lived or what he did for a living or even what his real name was.

He was marketing _Why, not his real life persona.

And that in fact made _Why a stronger brand.

Have a look at the band 'The Cure' and Netochka Nezvanova.

Both of them were amazing marketeers, and _Why worked very much in that spirit.

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#59

Post by jacquesm »

starkfist wrote: post #30
jmillikin wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Code can be used to create art. Wood can be used to create art. An HTML parser is not art, any more than disposable chopsticks are. I've never understood _why's fan base; he seems to be no more than somebody who popped up, wrote a few low-quality libraries for an obscure language, and then vanished.

Well, he's gone now. So you guys won.

Are you somehow suggesting that _Why disappeared because of the GP and 'his kind'?

Re: _why: A Tale Of A Post-Modern Genius

#60

Post by jacquesm »

iamdave wrote: post #10
aaronbrethorst wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smashing Magazine's title lacks the underscore, but the in-page title has one. HN's submitter bookmarklet copies the title tag's contents, and I neglected to fix it... update: there, fixed it. thanks :)

the w shouldn't be capitalized, either.

_why really is a brand then.
Post reply on HN