I'd like to buy Zack a drink, because all of this is obvious to those poor shmucks among us that handle the support end of things (also known as the "shit end"). I've been saying a lot of the same things for years. I'm tired of it now; I'm starting to give up, because it's obvious there isn't a programmer out there that gives a damn. You can try telling them that there's something wrong with software -- something fun…
The State of the Art is Terrible
91–100 of 242 posts
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#92Earlier quoted context omitted.
>allowed_users You can pay someone to implement this, as well as any other missing AD features, then open source it so no-one has to implement it again. The original devs that did much of the reverse-engineering work on Samba have since moved on to much more rewarding work. That work will essentially never be done again, nor be improved upon until financial incentives are introduced. Much of the work on Samba since h…
Thank you (seriously) for demonstrating the part where I said, "but they'd rather tell you why you're wrong rather than really listen to why you're frustrated." > ...as well as any other missing AD features... This isn't exactly a feature, it's a core part of AD permissions. Samba 4 was developed for the purpose of taking on server roles in an AD environment. > We are not your servants, we are people. Give value, get…
Unless I'm missing something, if software were perfect then there wouldn't be a need for support people?
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#93Earlier quoted context omitted.
>allowed_users You can pay someone to implement this, as well as any other missing AD features, then open source it so no-one has to implement it again. The original devs that did much of the reverse-engineering work on Samba have since moved on to much more rewarding work. That work will essentially never be done again, nor be improved upon until financial incentives are introduced. Much of the work on Samba since h…
Thank you (seriously) for demonstrating the part where I said, "but they'd rather tell you why you're wrong rather than really listen to why you're frustrated." > ...as well as any other missing AD features... This isn't exactly a feature, it's a core part of AD permissions. Samba 4 was developed for the purpose of taking on server roles in an AD environment. > We are not your servants, we are people. Give value, get…
Corpses write no code. shrugs
> If it was just one company that consistently produced crap software, it would be easy to say that there's probably something broken at that company.
Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand movement or methodology to be had here.
It's a people problem.
>For example, I might be writing a Jooma migration tool right now to fix the stupid 1.5->1.7 issues, and I'd be happy to release it and even support it for as long as people need it, but first I have to figure out what the hell is wrong with the wireless drivers in Linux on the new laptop...
This is why I use Linux for workstations where it seems more comfortable, and my Mac for my mobile machine as it's more tolerant of network/display disruption. I'm not trying to troll or be a Mac fanboy here, I prefer working in Linux as I am simply more productive and it's my production OS. But, a laptop that is on the move plays to the strengths of OS X sufficiently that I am travelling right now and using my Mac instead of my Linux laptop.
You're going to have to accept that if you use the wrong software for the wrong problems, you're going to keep getting poked in the eye. You're using bad hammers and complaining about how bad hammers are.
There's a distinction to be made, an important one.
>Now, here's the other half of it: support people are not your janitors.
Open source projects don't have "support people", they have contributors and devs that volunteer their time. I worked for a MOTU and volunteered in the #ubuntu channel on FreeNode for years. I've done thousands of man-hours of support. I know exactly how bad software is, and how bad the situation is.
I'm on your side here, but until you start solving the problems one at a time, nothing changes.
My apartment gets cleaned one trash bag at a time.
>The harder my job gets, the less likely I am to contribute.
Something's gotta give. Stuff like Joomla registers as shitware in the circles I go in.
Complaining about things like Joomla, PHP, Drupal, Outlook, etc. doesn't really register with me.
Might as well buy a Kia and complain about how terrible the state of automobiles are. The author had much stronger points than you have. You work with some terrible stuff, period.
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#94I'd like to buy Zack a drink, because all of this is obvious to those poor shmucks among us that handle the support end of things (also known as the "shit end"). I've been saying a lot of the same things for years. I'm tired of it now; I'm starting to give up, because it's obvious there isn't a programmer out there that gives a damn. You can try telling them that there's something wrong with software -- something fun…
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#95Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#96Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you (seriously) for demonstrating the part where I said, "but they'd rather tell you why you're wrong rather than really listen to why you're frustrated." > ...as well as any other missing AD features... This isn't exactly a feature, it's a core part of AD permissions. Samba 4 was developed for the purpose of taking on server roles in an AD environment. > We are not your servants, we are people. Give value, get…
> support people are not your janitors. Quit expecting us to spend hours digging through arcane documentation, followed by further hours troubleshooting things that you left half-finished, and then turn around and tell us to write it our own damn selves. Because, seriously, there just aren't enough hours in the day. Unless I'm missing something, if software were perfect then there wouldn't be a need for support peopl…
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#97Earlier quoted context omitted.
Thank you (seriously) for demonstrating the part where I said, "but they'd rather tell you why you're wrong rather than really listen to why you're frustrated." > ...as well as any other missing AD features... This isn't exactly a feature, it's a core part of AD permissions. Samba 4 was developed for the purpose of taking on server roles in an AD environment. > We are not your servants, we are people. Give value, get…
>Eh, I appreciate that, really, but I don't want to stop caring. I want it to be better. Corpses write no code. shrugs > If it was just one company that consistently produced crap software, it would be easy to say that there's probably something broken at that company. Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand move…
Disagree. I don't think 95-98% of programmers are idiots. However, a lot of programmers (even some very smart ones) are terrible architects and have no sense of the big picture. Moreover, a lot of projects start out well but turn to shit through neglect and departure from the original architecture.
95-98% of software architecture is deplorable, but that's not because our industry is has 20+ idiots for every decently smart person. It's a lot more subtle than that. A big part of the problem is that most of professional programming is so disconnected and often alienating that a lot of programmers never learn architecture and its importance; the only way to really learn it is to support your own creation and experience first-hand the consequences of your original decisions. A lot of programmers never have that experience.
In sum, I think the general shittiness of the software industry and of architecture has a lot more to do with the fact that few programmers never have the experiences that will make them any good, than it does with a lack of talent. It takes 10,000 hours of deliberate practice to become good at something, but most of what most programmers do for work is not "deliberate practice"; it's repetitive drudge work that they often don't have the creative control to automate.
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#98While tools like functional programming may indeed deliver on the promise of a 60% code reduction, they have a correspondingly higher barrier to learning. Evolving algorithms? Automatic programming? These problems become theoretically intractable so quickly it's not even funny (I currently do research on a very related problem). He wants compilers to just insert the semicolon for him? I'm glad mechanical engineers of the world don't have the same attitude about nails and screws!
Most of his complaints in truth have nothing to do with computer science at all. They have everything to do with sloppy engineering. There are all sorts of obvious reasons why computer engineering is sloppy. A few examples:
1) Developers for open source project usually are not paid. It's not surprising that documentation is weak.
2) Reliability and turn-key operation are expensive to develop and nobody wants to pay. I'm sure the author of the article doesn't either.
3) Bugs have lower impact. Screw up a building foundation and you might end up in jail. A clunky install process? Probably all that will happen is a scolding and a new issue in the tracker.
4) Things change so fast that standards can't keep up. The same goes for most other engineering frameworks that would solve many of the problems Morris complains about.
We've made and continue to make huge progress in the field of computer science. Computers have and continue to replace people in jobs all over the world. Morris should be happy they haven't replaced his job yet. Not working may sound nice, but having an income is also nice. That has nothing to do with computers.
Computers have made our lives easier. If I went back 10 years and told my younger self what I can do today with just my mobile phone, I doubt my younger self would even believe me.
The problem is not that progress is bad. It's that progress is moving too fast for engineering to keep up with. The state of the art is constantly changing.
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#99Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Eh, I appreciate that, really, but I don't want to stop caring. I want it to be better. Corpses write no code. shrugs > If it was just one company that consistently produced crap software, it would be easy to say that there's probably something broken at that company. Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand move…
Anything below the top, say, 2-5% of software is guaranteed to be shit because all the programmers below the top 2-5% are shit. There is no grand movement or methodology to be had here. It's a people problem. Disagree. I don't think 95-98% of programmers are idiots. However, a lot of programmers (even some very smart ones) are terrible architects and have no sense of the big picture. Moreover, a lot of projects start…
I didn't say that.
> It takes 10,000 hours of deliberate practice to become good at something,
People need to stop re-hashing this. 10,000 hours of deliberate practice is likely but not necessarily going to make you an excellent programmer. I know plenty of programmers in their 40s and older who have that much time in or more that are frankly, garbage.
Investing time is necessary, but insufficient, and there is no one grand unified number that defines all professions for what is necessary to become excellent for every individual.
I know a 60-something whose code output terrifies me and he has a great deal more than 10,000 hours invested in programming.
OTOH, one of the programmers I most deeply respect is a 50-year old woman.
It's hit or miss. In my experience, passion counts more than anything.
>but that's not because our industry is has 20+ idiots for every decently smart person.
Work at a major insurance/something-not-directly-related-to-software company. That's an optimistic ratio.
Re: The State of the Art is Terrible
#100I'd like to buy Zack a drink, because all of this is obvious to those poor shmucks among us that handle the support end of things (also known as the "shit end"). I've been saying a lot of the same things for years. I'm tired of it now; I'm starting to give up, because it's obvious there isn't a programmer out there that gives a damn. You can try telling them that there's something wrong with software -- something fun…
Every now and then I decide I don't like being a programmer anymore. And then I remember its the only thing I'm good at.