21–30 of 39 posts
Eckhart Tolle would say we don't even have an identity.
As I read the main article for this thread, I was thinking, "what does this guy mean by 'identity'"? A little jaunt down a philosophical rat hole can be fun sometimes.
The easiest way to open yourself up to accepting criticism is to realize you are not the smartest person in the room, so to speak. It is never about being the smartest person because at some point even the smartest person will be replaced. I've learned to accept criticism by realizing that it's not about where I am now but where I am going. As long as I can look back on code I've written in the past and think to myse…
> The easiest way to open yourself up to accepting criticism is to realize you are not the smartest person in the room I think that's irrelevant. Every human being is stupid. Saying you're the smartest person on the room, in absolute terms, is analogous to saying you're the smartest termite in the planet. Even if you're much smarter than others, that's irrelevant. Suppose the smartest person on earth is right twice a…
Irrelevant? It's my entire proposition in no absolute terms. Of course everyone is stupid and anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills can understand this. My point was that it is often difficult to accept criticism because we're pressured to believe we need to be the best or at least better than everyone else we see ourselves competing against. Criticism then seems like a personal attack and makes it difficult to accept since it can lower your perceived position amongst your peers.
Humility is the easiest solution I put forth. Once we realize just how stupid we are we can look at criticism as a chance to learn something and improve ourselves. And maybe when we give some criticism we'll try to be more thoughtful and be constructive.
That said, when I look across the spectrum of developer types from those who feel too much ownership of their code vs. those who take no ownership of their code -- I find the latter to be more common.
These days, when I'm advising junior developers on how to make their mark while getting better at their craft; I lean more toward stressing their need to take ownership of the code they write and the projects they work on.
I'd agree more with another poster in this thread, agentultra, who stressed learning to accept criticism -- rather than this article's seeming recommendation of avoiding association with your own work.
Stop equating bad code with bad developers. Stop equating code criticisms as a knock against you as a person. To me, what I find jarring is how common bad code is and how incredibly rare well-designed systems and good code are. It seems obvious that the causes of bad code are numerous (only one of which is unskilled developers) and the conditions that allow good software to be created are very rare. You have a lot of…
(1) you really don't know what conditions caused the code to become bad
There is totally a spectrum all the way from laziness to understandably tight deadlines to unreasonable deadlines. You totally hit the nail on the head. There is a lot more context surrounding why code is written the way it is than just "This guy/gal is horrible".
(2) it means you make an enemy of the one person who can help you out
There are peers of mine that I look up to, that I consistently am impressed with and they continually push me to be a better developer. The funny (and slightly embarrassing) thing is that for most of them that I met early on I thought were idiots. The favorite phrase "You're doing it wrong!"
I'm lucky that I kept my mouth shut and honestly tried to digest their perspectives/opinions. Now I may still disagree with them, but it's from a place of respect, not out of condescension.
I joke with one of my favorite coders, https://twitter.com/#!/bkeepers , that the first time I met him I thought "This dude is a complete asshole." And I ignored him for months afterwards. That was all from my own insecurity. Brandon is a hella smart and nice guy.
All too often, X = Someone else's flaws. This is the first great shortcoming in the human condition that we have to get over. Validating ourselves by pointing out the flaws of others cripples relationships and society as a whole.
The next logical step in this progression is X = My Career. Money is the ultimate measuring stick in our society, so the thing that we all do to make money is what we often use to declare our value.
This is also a mistake, because whatever your career achieves - whether it be shipping a new piece of code or inventing a widget - your contribution to society will ultimately be fleeting. It may out live you, but it will not last.
The realization we all need to come to is that our value compared to one another does not determine our worth. The greatest human being is not substantially different from the least human being. And in realizing that the difference between human beings is unsubstantial, the only way to determine your worth as a human is how well you treated your fellows.
Feed a hungry person. Clothe a naked person. Shelter the shelterless. Cheer up the depressed. Comfort the mourning. That's where you'll find validation. That's where worth is derived.
The article raises some interesting issues. I've solo written my fair share of prototype or rush-to-market code that tens of millions of dollars of revenue became dependent upon and then had to deal with criticism over how I wrote it years later from guys who really wouldn't have gotten hired if I hadn't hacked the hell out of things in the first place to close the deal and get the money flowing. That said, when I lo…
Maybe own it till you're proud of it, then let it go! Schedules don't always allow every codule to be the shining star in your portfolio, but there should maybe be pride to be had in a really dirty hack done on an insane deadline ^_^
I don't think that was what the article was about, but I think that bare statement,"Your identity ≠ Your code", is wrong.
The article raises some interesting issues. I've solo written my fair share of prototype or rush-to-market code that tens of millions of dollars of revenue became dependent upon and then had to deal with criticism over how I wrote it years later from guys who really wouldn't have gotten hired if I hadn't hacked the hell out of things in the first place to close the deal and get the money flowing. That said, when I lo…
I'm not sure how you read into this. I certainly wasn't intending for that statement. Code can be a medium of expression but it usually is a means to end (a working solution). I don't think there's anything wrong in someone taking pride in a solution. It's when their pride holds them back from improving or worse, not even attempting due to the inevitable criticism that will follow. I don't see them mutually exclusive, you just need a healthy dose of humility.
> That said, when I look across the spectrum of developer types from those who feel too much ownership of their code vs. those who take no ownership of their code -- I find the latter to be more common.
I'm sure there are many developers who just to clock in and clock out, however I'm also guessing there is a good portion who want to take ownership but are afraid of the risk of criticism. And fear it for the wrong reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The easiest way to open yourself up to accepting criticism is to realize you are not the smartest person in the room I think that's irrelevant. Every human being is stupid. Saying you're the smartest person on the room, in absolute terms, is analogous to saying you're the smartest termite in the planet. Even if you're much smarter than others, that's irrelevant. Suppose the smartest person on earth is right twice a…
> I think that's irrelevant. Irrelevant? It's my entire proposition in no absolute terms. Of course everyone is stupid and anyone with a modicum of critical thinking skills can understand this. My point was that it is often difficult to accept criticism because we're pressured to believe we need to be the best or at least better than everyone else we see ourselves competing against. Criticism then seems like a person…
Eckhart Tolle would say we don't even have an identity.
I had to give you an up vote just for making me google "Eckhart Tolle" and read the wikipedia page on him. As I read the main article for this thread, I was thinking, "what does this guy mean by 'identity'"? A little jaunt down a philosophical rat hole can be fun sometimes.