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

Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

sociosage.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 56 posts

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#21

Post by aMoniker »

noahc wrote: post #9

I am torn on this issue. I try not to be like this, but words have meaning. And if words don't have meaning or have arbitrary meaning then we can't communicate. Some words have more specific meaning than others. One thing that drives me absolutely nuts is when people (my girlfriend) use supposedly to not mean anything. My girlfriend uses it when someone else told her something. So she might say, "Supposedly, She went…

As your girlfriend wasn't there to observe that person going into town, the word 'supposedly' makes sense.

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#22

Post by kenjackson »

AznHisoka wrote: post #2

Being consistent means learning new habits. You might require some self discipline initially, but as time goes along, it becomes a habit and you don't need as much discipline, especially when you start to see tangible progress. So I can see why he would be anal about it.

But what you've described is almost the textbook definition of discipline.

"calm controlled behavior: the ability to behave in a controlled and calm way even in a difficult or stressful situation"

The pedant was able to create new habits that allowed him to be controlled and stick to a routine even in the presence of stimuli that would cause him to no longer exibit this control.

The term consistency, when applied to human behavior, is almost always a form of discipline -- except when it comes to certain bodily functions... like heartbeat or going to the bathroom.

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#23

Post by vitalychernobyl »

I love that this made it on Hackernews so as to prove the non-techies point! :-D

He is right too - when dealing with the hard sciences it's most important to BE RIGHT (it's either a 0 or 1 - and it matters), but when dealing with relationships it's much more important to BE EMPATHETIC.

If you aren't - you'll be seen as a contrarian/confrontational.

I think we need to practice "being ok with being wrong" when the relationship matters more than the subject matter. Cheers!

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#24

Post by LukeShu »

eli wrote: post #17
noahc wrote: post #9

I am torn on this issue. I try not to be like this, but words have meaning. And if words don't have meaning or have arbitrary meaning then we can't communicate. Some words have more specific meaning than others. One thing that drives me absolutely nuts is when people (my girlfriend) use supposedly to not mean anything. My girlfriend uses it when someone else told her something. So she might say, "Supposedly, She went…

Some people believe the dictionary prescribes how words are to be used. Others believe the dictionary merely captures descriptions of how words are already being used. I think the truth is probably somewhere in between.

These aren't so much beliefs of "what dictionaries do", but what they should do. For example, Websters aims to be descriptive, not prescriptive. How much they succeed is debatable. The point is that this issue isn't solely in the mind of the reader.

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#26

Post by subLimb »

aMoniker wrote: post #21
noahc wrote: post #9

I am torn on this issue. I try not to be like this, but words have meaning. And if words don't have meaning or have arbitrary meaning then we can't communicate. Some words have more specific meaning than others. One thing that drives me absolutely nuts is when people (my girlfriend) use supposedly to not mean anything. My girlfriend uses it when someone else told her something. So she might say, "Supposedly, She went…

As your girlfriend wasn't there to observe that person going into town, the word 'supposedly' makes sense.

Maybe technically, but the word doesn't really add anything to the statement if someone uses it anytime they didn't observe what happened. Supposedly is akin to saying "Assuming what this person said is true, ..." which in many cases implies doubt (why not just say "so and so said she went into town").

I think his point was that it makes literal sense, but it doesn't help the process of communication, which is why he's torn on the issue.

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#28

Post by flueedo »

I don't talk in technical terms with people who won't understand them. I would never get in that kind of semantic debate if I were the friend who had lost weight. I would however most definitely get into a discussion like that if we were both translators, linguists, behavioral scientists or something like that.

Consistency means self-discipline in his case. But many 'consistent behaviors' in living and non-living agents mean something else entirely.

That said, this made me think of one particular type of "technical smartasses" that have pissed me in the past: Lawyers and their legalese.

Re: Why Technical Smart Asses are Technically Dumb Asses

#29

Post by billpatrianakos »

Not to disparage anyone but actually see this technical smartass stuff in the comments on HN all the time. Someone makes a good point then someone else nitpicks the most irrelevant detail or pulls out the dictionary definition of the word even though the person's point is clear as day.

I agree with the author on a lot of this and personally feel that this sort of thing is a sign of poor social skills and an inability to see different perspectives or the bigger picture. It can get pretty exhausting.

It's funny that a number of comments on this story exemplify the author's point perfectly. Don't get me wrong though. Please don't take this as me complaining. I'm actually really happy with this community but you've got to admit that what the author is talking about goes on so often around here it's not even funny.

Most of the time focusing on the technical details will get you nowhere but missing the point, totally off track, and arguing something very much unrelated to the original topic. Case in point: see the comments on the post about SpecialForces.com getting hacked. People started missing the point and talking about the user's password strength instead of what was really at issue (the security of the admin's access methods and credentials).

Post reply on HN