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

71–80 of 183 posts

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

#71

Post by nir »

jacquesm wrote: post #57
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.

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

There are a lot of creative people, for sure. Discussing whether X is more creative than Y is meaningless. Ultimately it's about how X or Y's work resonates with you.

>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.

"In my opinion".

Personally, I've seen few things in any field that struck me as comparable in originality to The Poignant Guide, for example. I would never imagine a language tutorial that would be essentially a cartoon, and a pretty brilliant one at that, accompanied by a soundtrack - but also a working online console and eventually a whole new programming language.

Looking at his entire body work, it's impressive this was all done by one person, but it's incredible that this person actually didn't make any attempts to reap financial rewards from it, in the age where everyone with a few blog posts behind him is telling you "you should follow me on Twitter".

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

#72

Post by philwelch »

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 wrote code, made music, and made visual art, and he seemed to think the three activities had enough similarities to share the name "art".

Incidentally, I also consider engineering to be art, only with more constraints.

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

#73

Post by jacquesm »

nir wrote: post #71
jacquesm wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> A few million creative artists would probably disagree without you, some violently so There are a lot of creative people, for sure. Discussing whether X is more creative than Y is meaningless. Ultimately it's about how X or Y's work resonates with you. > 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. "In my opinion". Personally, I've…

> I would never imagine a language tutorial that would be essentially a cartoon, and a pretty brilliant one at that,

Have a look at the early TRS-80 manuals, they were exactly that, no soundtrack though, it was on 'dead tree' format for want of a bit-mapped display on that particular computer.

That does not diminish what _why did but it is not quite as original as you may think.

> Looking at his entire body work, it's impressive this was all done by one person,

Absolutely.

> but it's incredible that this person actually didn't make any attempts to reap financial rewards from it,

Agreed, but he's hardly alone in that, the open source world is full of people that have given an enormous chunk of their lives without getting much or even anything in return.

> in the age where everyone with a few blog posts behind him is telling you "you should follow me on Twitter".

And on that we also agree.

In fact the whole 'get rich quick' mentality can take a running jump as far as I'm concerned.

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

#74

Post by ismarc »

jacquesm wrote: post #67
ellyagg wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I saw a few years ago a study which claimed professional programmers had the second or third highest average IQs of any occupation. Probably depends on how you measure, but you get my point. After 10 years of programming, it's only gotten marginally easier. The fundamental stuff of programming, solving highly complex and abstract problems, never seems to go away. Somehow I doubt bricklayers can say the same.

Programming is part craft, part science, and occasionally a very small dash of inspiration or art. But for the most part I think that a very large amount of it is very comparable to bricklaying. Especially in the part where most people in the IT world make their money, such as software for the financial and the business world. Rarely does it elevate itself to the level of watchmaking and even rarer do you find art. I…

Bricklaying is actually a really good comparison to programming. It's stacking bricks with glue. But those bricks eventually end up making an entire building. And with that, you have corners, archways, windows, doorways that you have to determine how to cut or turn the bricks so that it will support the bricks you're going to put above it, or the lack of bricks below it. Bricklaying is a craft and an application of sciences that are well understood. That's the reason why so many comparisons fall flat, why there's discussion about "is it science" and "is it art". The only part of software development (I'd like to use the term engineering and have it mean that one day, it'd be nice) that's art should one day be science.

Let's face it, with programming, we're inventing entirely new domains with their own special rules that we create. It can be an artistic process or a scientific process. As an artistic process, it's very hard to judge the outcome from the start. As a scientific process, the result is much easier to judge prior to completion. Until the processes and methods are understood to a sufficient level, programming will be very much like an art. Once they're understood, it's a science, apply the rules and out pops a software.

I have several relatives that are plumbers, electricians, carpenters and architects. Once there's a common set of tools, language (as in, for communication between people) and understanding, programming is no different than any other craft.

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

#75

Post by igravious »

compay wrote: post #43
igravious wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yo. I would suggest that as an admitted non-fan of Ruby then you are in no position to comment. Besides, _why could draw, anyone could appreciate his stuff I'd imagine. He could play music. He had a quirky sense of humour, and was a creative and endlessly surprising person. Now, this ain't sycophantic as you call, he genuinely was these things. Sorry if that bothers you. There's this cute paper some guy once wrote, i…

"I would suggest that as an admitted non-fan of Ruby then you are in no position to comment." I like _why too, but but by telling gdp shut up because he's not a "fan," you're actually making it much easier for him to make his point.

Point taken. That was my second attempt. (The first was far less civil.) I am still of the opinion that gdp's comment was far more mean-spirited than my rejoinder. Or if not mean-spirited then lacking in imagination or possessing a real disconnect about what motivates people. But ok, point taken - my bad, I retract that part of my comment.

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

#76

Post by jacquesm »

ismarc wrote: post #74
jacquesm wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Programming is part craft, part science, and occasionally a very small dash of inspiration or art. But for the most part I think that a very large amount of it is very comparable to bricklaying. Especially in the part where most people in the IT world make their money, such as software for the financial and the business world. Rarely does it elevate itself to the level of watchmaking and even rarer do you find art. I…

Bricklaying is actually a really good comparison to programming. It's stacking bricks with glue. But those bricks eventually end up making an entire building. And with that, you have corners, archways, windows, doorways that you have to determine how to cut or turn the bricks so that it will support the bricks you're going to put above it, or the lack of bricks below it. Bricklaying is a craft and an application of s…

The windows, corners, doorways and arches where exactly what I had in mind, but even a straight wall is already pretty hard. Each building is, when it's done a work of art, and possibly more so than most computer programs, especially your garden variety throw-away web-app.

The 'art' part in programming is exactly that part where it is not yet a science.

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

#77

Post by jgg »

antirez wrote: post #20
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…

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…

(Note that this response isn't an attack on you specifically, it's just my feelings towards this argument in general)

Where is the magical divide between "art" and "science" in the field? Do the adherents of either side even know what they're defending?

If I know what a finite state machine is and how to apply it, does that make me "scientific"?

If I hack together a web application in Scheme, instead of some Mathemagical, Dijkstra-approved language, does that make me an "artist"?

Why can't people just accept that you need some of both to be a good programmer?

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

#78

Post by jacquesm »

jgg wrote: post #77
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…

(Note that this response isn't an attack on you specifically, it's just my feelings towards this argument in general) Where is the magical divide between "art" and "science" in the field? Do the adherents of either side even know what they're defending? If I know what a finite state machine is and how to apply it, does that make me "scientific"? If I hack together a web application in Scheme, instead of some Mathemag…

To me the art part in programming is that part which has not yet been 'beaten to death' and formalized.

As soon as something is idiomatic I think it ceases to be art, but that does not diminish the artistry of the person or people that first came up with that.

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

#79

Post by ismarc »

jimbokun wrote: post #51
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…

"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…

An electrician is not given absolute exacting directions on what to do and then follows them by wrote. A master electrician is given guidelines (in the form of regulations) and then a list of what the customer wants. They then consolidate the two into a plan for the building (locations of outlets, fuse boxes, etc.). Once the general plan is done (what power is needed where for what) they have to determine where at what type of wires and junction boxes need to be places, working through the design of the building. Once the electrical diagram is completed, it's handed off to a journeyman, who, with other electricians, run the wires as close to the plan as possible, frequently having to deviate slightly due to the differences in reality.

This is the absolute, most common, frequently found, frequently followed process for developing software. There is more "wiggle room" at each step, but it's the same exact process, whether it's one guy doing it and dreaming up the requirements or a team of thousands of developers.

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

#80

Post by jacquesm »

ismarc wrote: post #79
jimbokun wrote: post #51

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." 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…

An electrician is not given absolute exacting directions on what to do and then follows them by wrote. A master electrician is given guidelines (in the form of regulations) and then a list of what the customer wants. They then consolidate the two into a plan for the building (locations of outlets, fuse boxes, etc.). Once the general plan is done (what power is needed where for what) they have to determine where at wh…

Exactly. Now the big difference to me is in the kind of programming.

For instance, the people that write papers on new datastructures, computer vision and other state-of-the-art developments. They're not working with 'requirements' other than 'it would be nice if you found a way to solve 'X', come back in three years'. (well, not quite like that, but closely).

That's basic research and a definite amount of artistry is involved at that level.

But after the paper is written up it has solidified and it becomes applicable science, and for the person calling the API that embodies the concept it has become 'mere' bricklaying.

Post reply on HN