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

How Software Companies Die (1995)

cs.cmu.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 176 posts

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#71

Post by [deleted] »

rmc wrote: post #66
yummyfajitas wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your characterization of OSC is incorrect. He only believes sodomy laws should be used carefully to make sure people don't "shake the confidence of the community", and that most homosexuals should not be jailed. http://www.nauvoo.com/library/card-hypocrites.html I don't agree with OSC, and I doubt he'd like me very much due to my propensity for casual sex and my desire to abolish state marriage. That said, I do share…

I do share his distaste for the gay rights movement's propensity to attack and attempt to blacklist and attack their opponents. I have a dislike for the anti-gay rights movement's attempt to kill gay people. Communism has been far more harmful to the world than opposition to gay marriage. Spoken like a breeder.

[deleted]

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#72

Post by ronaldx »

chris_wot wrote: post #46
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #2

We all know that OSC is a horrible bigot, right? I feel like any sort of fatherly advice he emits needs to be suffixed with "...unless you're gay, then you should be in prison."

Wow, way to go. Whilst he may have some beliefs that aren't very popular or even nice, does that mean that what's in the article is bad or wrong? Perhaps you should focus on his arguments, and not on the man himself. For once, this really is an ad hominem attack!

I would make an ad hominem attack, yes. I don't believe ad hominem is fallacious in this sense.

Orson Scott Card has expressed such a lack of humanity elswhere that I do not understand why I would spend my time deciding whether his other arguments have any merit. He has disqualified himself from my consideration.

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#74

Post by barking »

rmc wrote: post #66
yummyfajitas wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your characterization of OSC is incorrect. He only believes sodomy laws should be used carefully to make sure people don't "shake the confidence of the community", and that most homosexuals should not be jailed. http://www.nauvoo.com/library/card-hypocrites.html I don't agree with OSC, and I doubt he'd like me very much due to my propensity for casual sex and my desire to abolish state marriage. That said, I do share…

I do share his distaste for the gay rights movement's propensity to attack and attempt to blacklist and attack their opponents. I have a dislike for the anti-gay rights movement's attempt to kill gay people. Communism has been far more harmful to the world than opposition to gay marriage. Spoken like a breeder.

Breeder, a heterophobic term of abuse, I presume?

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#75

Post by PavlovsCat »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #69
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-gay position is criticized and/or boycotted. "The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-black position is criticized and/or boycotted." "The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-woman position is criticized and/or boycotted." "The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-Jew positi…

The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds a pro-Obamacare position is criticized and/or boycotted. The time has now come to the point where anyone who holds a pro-privacy position is now criticized and/or boycotted. The time has now come to the point where anyone who holds an anti-polygamy position is now criticized and/or boycotted. Yes, lets all give up reasoned discourse and simply attack those who…

Is "don't buy from Nazis" really the same as "don't buy from Jews"? It's not about attacking people who disagree, it's about withdrawing support from those who attack others.

Let's say, someone beats their wife brutally, but they're very good at bowling, and always treat you respectfully. Would you feel good about going bowling with them, regardless of how much objectively correct things about bowling they could teach you? Or would you realize the world is full of people who know as much and more, who don't come with quite such a bad aftertase?

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#76

Post by jessaustin »

rmc wrote: post #62
nashashmi wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is that wrong again?! It is true that they are trying to gain legitimacy. It is no longer about rights but now it is about acceptance. The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-gay position is criticized and/or boycotted. Now we have not just reached giving gays equal treatment but making changes to accommodate a different lifestyle. The second point OSC makes is sourced in a discomfort fr…

The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-gay position is criticized and/or boycotted You say that like it's a bad thing. It is no longer about rights but now it is about acceptance (a) There are still lots of rights that many states and organisations do not recognise. (b) There is no difference between rights and acceptance/legitimacy.

There is no difference between rights and acceptance/legitimacy.

In a society that hopes to remain free, there must be a difference between these. There must be space for dialogue, for experimentation, for uncertainty, for personal preference, for disagreement. "Everything which is not prohibited is mandatory" is a totalitarian motto.

For example, although I find Nancy Grace repulsive, illegitimate, unacceptable, unwatchable, and generally awful, at some level I realize she has the right to produce her execrable television programs, and I don't seek to undermine that right.

Perhaps I'm quibbling over a minor point, as I certainly have no quarrel with criticism and boycotts of OSC (or of anyone really), even though I don't choose to take part myself.

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#77

Post by Jare »

jmcgough wrote: post #60
Jare wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

His book Lost Boys contains pretty fair descriptions of the videogame industry and development processes in the 80's, and he did a good amount of videogames writing in the 90's, including Monkey Island, The Dig and the disaster that was Neohunter.

What was disastrous about Neohunter? It looks like an interesting idea, but other than the old box art (with description of the game) I can't really find any information on it.

The gameplay was stale and the visuals tried to abuse pre-3D technology to add depth and immersion to what was an oldschool 2D point and shoot, but the tech and art were simply not up for the task. Ed Kilham (of Tie Fighter fame) is an awesome guy but he can't make miracles. Orson Scott Card's story was essentially invisible behind the mess, and apparently he didn't care much for it either.

http://www.gamefront.com/gaming-todays-exclusive-interview-w...

"a side-scrolling shooter that I’m not sure was ever published, since it was coming out just when first-person shooters completely took over the genre. However, for that game I came up with the slang that I later used in battle school in the Shadow books and in the movie scripts I’ve written for Ender’s Game. Nothing gets wasted."

(disclaimer: as they were finishing Neohunter, Ronin hired my bro to do their future tech and rendering, and IMHO things improved a lot for Ronin in that area)

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#78

Post by 72deluxe »

humanfromearth wrote: post #31
brazzy wrote: post #17

Was this as ridiculous a pastiche of clichés when it was written in 1995 as it is now? Or did programmers really only start to have social lives, dislike permanent crunch mode and plan before coding in the last 20 years? It sounds to me like Card read through the Jargon file, i.e. the self-image of a considerably earlier subculture of programmers, took it at face value, added some hyperbole and wrote it up as a kind…

I had the same reaction. Pizzas? Overweight dudes with their 'tight' code?

I would live on pizzas and coffee. Seems the newer generation of programmers don't like that sort of thing! I'm not old by any stretch of the imagination, but I always thought of programmers as beardy types with awkward glasses, brown trousers and a crumpled shirt/t-shirt. (I never ironed my shirts, that's for sure!). And coffee was always black. Programmers were more like engineers.

As stated, this brogrammer persona is a new thing. No lattes for me thanks!

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#79

Post by barry-cotter »

jessaustin wrote: post #76
rmc wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The time has come now to the point where anyone who holds an anti-gay position is criticized and/or boycotted You say that like it's a bad thing. It is no longer about rights but now it is about acceptance (a) There are still lots of rights that many states and organisations do not recognise. (b) There is no difference between rights and acceptance/legitimacy.

There is no difference between rights and acceptance/legitimacy. In a society that hopes to remain free, there must be a difference between these. There must be space for dialogue, for experimentation, for uncertainty, for personal preference, for disagreement. "Everything which is not prohibited is mandatory" is a totalitarian motto. For example, although I find Nancy Grace repulsive, illegitimate, unacceptable, unw…

Yeah, that's a very totalitarian point of view. Believe as I do or eat bullets subhuman scum.

Re: How Software Companies Die (1995)

#80

Post by DanBC »

narag wrote: post #51
Udo wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it makes sense to have that bot as an actual separate site feature. Personally, it's not something I'd want to be mixed in with normal comments.

What about offering it as a service to the submitter from the submission page?

Or even a browser extension?
Post reply on HN