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

Joel on Software: Anecdotes

joelonsoftware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 65 posts

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#11

Post by spolsky »

sharkfish wrote: post #7

It kills me how the Gladwell book brought this out of Joel. Nobody wants to be told their success is a good part luck and timing. They all want to believe it is because they are smarter and worked harder. So suddenly the software world's number one anecdotal blowhard decides to slam another blowhard. Okay. Whatever.

Um, lemme see if I understand here, what you're saying... Are you claiming that (a) I'm successful, and (b) I think that I'm successful because I'm smarter and worked harder and (c) Malcolm Gladwell thinks I'm successful because of good luck and timing and that (d) therefore I'm mad at Gladwell's new book and that (e) therefore I decided to slam it? Is that your theory?

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#12

Post by DaniFong »

spolsky wrote: post #8
pg wrote: post #2

A lot of essays are extrapolated anecdotes. It's not an intrinsically evil form. You just have to do it right.

If you have real data, and used the anecdote to illustrate it, you're doing it right. If you give us the anecdote, but don't extrapolate to wild grand theories, you're doing it right... simultaneously telling an interesting story and giving people more data points to build up their own understanding of how the world works. If you give us an anecdote, then tag on some theory so that the anecdote isn't mere storytellin…

There are many theories that Gladwell's book ties together, and there's some pretty serious data on each of them. I know three, and all of this book I've read are excerpts. Each of his books includes a reading list and citations, and I don't think this will be any different. In particular, page 10 of Flynn's book is worth reading. It is not merely Gladwell's hypothesis.

Terman et. al's studies of gifted children (http://books.google.com/books?id=MXwVAAAAIAAJ&printsec=f...)

Sherar et. al's study of physical maturity in hockey player development (http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/content~content=a778078133~...)

Flynn's book "On Intelligence" and review of the growing IQ of the worldwide population and ethnographic studies of Chinese. (http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=qvBipuypY...)

I don't think one should claim an insufficient justification of his hypotheses without actually examining the justification thoroughly.

Oftentimes, for Gladwell in particular, people claim that he's being unrigorous, imprecise, or incomplete. He's not being incomplete. He's being concise. If he weren't concise, almost nobody would pay any attention. Almost nobody would learn anything from him. And almost nobody would, wanting to learn more, have the opportunity to follow the reference list that he carefully puts out. Which I guess few people do, anyway.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#13

Post by bokonist »

spolsky wrote: post #8
pg wrote: post #2

A lot of essays are extrapolated anecdotes. It's not an intrinsically evil form. You just have to do it right.

If you have real data, and used the anecdote to illustrate it, you're doing it right. If you give us the anecdote, but don't extrapolate to wild grand theories, you're doing it right... simultaneously telling an interesting story and giving people more data points to build up their own understanding of how the world works. If you give us an anecdote, then tag on some theory so that the anecdote isn't mere storytellin…

Most non-fiction books and essays are collections of anecdotes plus a guiding interpretation. Data (as in statistics) is hard to come by and rarely reliable. And without the interpretation, you simply have a bunch of mindless facts. The world has an infinite number of facts. Selecting facts and arranging them in a coherent interpretation is what most writing is about. Even the driest history textbook is mostly a work of interpretation.

Still, something about both Friedman and Gladwell really bothers me. I think it is simply that I believe their theories are mostly wrong or useless. It's not the style or methodology that is the problem, but the results.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#14

Post by sharkfish »

spolsky wrote: post #11
sharkfish wrote: post #7

It kills me how the Gladwell book brought this out of Joel. Nobody wants to be told their success is a good part luck and timing. They all want to believe it is because they are smarter and worked harder. So suddenly the software world's number one anecdotal blowhard decides to slam another blowhard. Okay. Whatever.

Um, lemme see if I understand here, what you're saying... Are you claiming that (a) I'm successful, and (b) I think that I'm successful because I'm smarter and worked harder and (c) Malcolm Gladwell thinks I'm successful because of good luck and timing and that (d) therefore I'm mad at Gladwell's new book and that (e) therefore I decided to slam it? Is that your theory?

1. I'm saying your timing is suspicious. 2. My own anecdotal experience tells me successful people want to believe they earned their success through brains and hard work 3. Gladwell states that a good portion of success is due to hard work but that you have to be lucky enough to be able to put in the 10,000 hours at the right time and of course, have the luxury of putting in that kind of dedication

So bottom line, he really flatters successful people on the surface, while making the successful folk equal to the rest of us.

I don't think you are "mad" at Gladwell. I just think the motivation is strong and possibly an unconscious aversion to accepting that your success may be in huge part due to luck.

But then. Take with a huge grain of salt some asshole spouting off on a forum.

Believe it or not, you are one of my heroes, and I never seriously expected YOU of all people to be reading this.

Cheers to you and don't stop doing what you do. We are a better field because of it.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#15

Post by run4yourlives »

spolsky wrote: post #8
pg wrote: post #2

A lot of essays are extrapolated anecdotes. It's not an intrinsically evil form. You just have to do it right.

If you have real data, and used the anecdote to illustrate it, you're doing it right. If you give us the anecdote, but don't extrapolate to wild grand theories, you're doing it right... simultaneously telling an interesting story and giving people more data points to build up their own understanding of how the world works. If you give us an anecdote, then tag on some theory so that the anecdote isn't mere storytellin…

I think you're setting an unattainable goal that would make for an extremely boring read. You might enjoy statistics that much, but most people don't.

Every single one of us is a collection of anecdotes, personal experiences and gathered data. Every single viewpoint ever held by every single person is a theory based on such a collection.

You aren't honestly suggesting that those opinions that are based more on the first two than the latter are completely invalid, thus unworthy of being shared?

Sure, books like the ones you describe - and in fact I'd posit at least 80% of your own blog posts, if not more - are more heavily invested in anecdote than they are proper data. They, and the conclusions they present are nonetheless valid pieces of information and help build a balanced view that is continually evolving.

The world is simply too complex a place to gather hard data on every possible subject matter before forming an opinion or articulating a theory. Some of the most outlandish theories in history - evolution, string theory, climate change all come to mind - start from anecdote and observation prior to being supported by hard facts and abundant data.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#16

Post by spolsky »

run4yourlives wrote: post #15
spolsky wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you have real data, and used the anecdote to illustrate it, you're doing it right. If you give us the anecdote, but don't extrapolate to wild grand theories, you're doing it right... simultaneously telling an interesting story and giving people more data points to build up their own understanding of how the world works. If you give us an anecdote, then tag on some theory so that the anecdote isn't mere storytellin…

I think you're setting an unattainable goal that would make for an extremely boring read. You might enjoy statistics that much , but most people don't. Every single one of us is a collection of anecdotes, personal experiences and gathered data. Every single viewpoint ever held by every single person is a theory based on such a collection. You aren't honestly suggesting that those opinions that are based more on the f…

Probably true. I'm probably suffering from some kind of temporary airport-bookstore-induced dementia which is making me particularly intolerant to this particular genre.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#17

Post by timr »

spolsky wrote: post #8
pg wrote: post #2

A lot of essays are extrapolated anecdotes. It's not an intrinsically evil form. You just have to do it right.

If you have real data, and used the anecdote to illustrate it, you're doing it right. If you give us the anecdote, but don't extrapolate to wild grand theories, you're doing it right... simultaneously telling an interesting story and giving people more data points to build up their own understanding of how the world works. If you give us an anecdote, then tag on some theory so that the anecdote isn't mere storytellin…

Essays aren't science, and shouldn't be held to the same intellectual standard. They don't have to be self-contained packets of truth, because we are reading them to be entertained, and are supposed to be discerning consumers of information, capable of filtering out others' over-generalizations and strained metaphors.

Obviously, it's best if an essay is both truthful and entertaining, but if an author decides to trade scientific precision to achieve a more vibrant story, that's fine with me. The world is far too big to stick to the facts.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#18

Post by mattmaroon »

This hit the nail on the head as to why I don't care for Gladwell's writings. I'm tired of telling smart friends that I think his books are largely useless (and incredibly boring) and getting the same look I would if I said that Jesus and L Ron Hubbard came to me in a dream and gave me a great recipe for chicken chili.

Though unlike Chris Anderson, at least the anecdotes Gladwell bases his stories on are true, rather than mistaken third-party analysis.

Re: Joel on Software: Anecdotes

#19

Post by run4yourlives »

spolsky wrote: post #16
run4yourlives wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're setting an unattainable goal that would make for an extremely boring read. You might enjoy statistics that much , but most people don't. Every single one of us is a collection of anecdotes, personal experiences and gathered data. Every single viewpoint ever held by every single person is a theory based on such a collection. You aren't honestly suggesting that those opinions that are based more on the f…

Probably true. I'm probably suffering from some kind of temporary airport-bookstore-induced dementia which is making me particularly intolerant to this particular genre.

Well, I'll give you the recent explosion of opinions on how our world works, that's for sure. It's getting people to do what they should have been doing in high-school though, which is think about why things are the way they are.

There are different stages of the journey, I suppose.

Post reply on HN