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

Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

buttondown.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 112 posts

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#101

Post by imchillyb »

"How's it different?" is an excellent metric.

Why pay you, a person with this as their resume, when I can pay someone with 10 other 'hits' on their resume and their software also does this?

Why pay the newb is a great question to ask.

The answer to 'How is it different' is a whiteboard interview problem. If the developer cannot immediately extol the virtues of their product, do you want to give them money? Are they confident in their skills? Were they just copying other's recipes?

You'll know the answer to that and many other questions the minute the developer has to think and answer this fundamental question.

You'll also know if they're full of shit almost immediately.

It doesn't matter what the developer's prior relationship to you was. When they hand you software, and expect others to pay for it they need to be asked this question. Their answer will assist them in understanding their product and how to sell it to others.

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#102

Post by samatman »

At the time I write this reply, the word "pie" shows up 98 times on this thread.

The word CRISP? Will show up once, when I hit "add comment".

This has brought out the worst of Hacker News in a very obvious way. I suppose it was damn near guaranteed to, but you didn't have to literally every one of you bring a CRISPer to a pie fight.

"As a peer reviewer for the CRISP organization (ok, three times) the author is very obviously wrong about pie. It is a moral duty that pie be original work, properly cited, and advance the state of the art. I stopped reading after the second paragraph."

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#104

Post by chipsrafferty »

strangattractor wrote: post #77
jp57 wrote: post #22

As others have mentioned, a pie is consumable, and thus a good one has value even if it isn't original. But a slight change to the original scenario makes asking about originality much more reasonable: Imagine you write a peach pie recipe over the weekend, and you give a copy of the recipe to your friend. They respond: "Wait, how is this different from every other peach pie recipe that's ever been written? It seems r…

When a User adopts a new piece of software an investment of time and effort is necessary (not so for eating a pie). If a particular piece of software doesn't do anything to improve the User's current process it is a wasted investment. If the User currently doesn't use a similar piece of software because they found what is available lacking then why invest if the new software doesn't do anything different. Asking how…

Didn't know eating pie was 0 time.

Personally, it takes me less time to decide whether some new software is crap and not worth my time than it does to eat a pie.

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#105

Post by krisoft »

sqeaky wrote: post #73
krisoft wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> software that does nothing differently or better than the existing (well-known) solutions is just, well, not interesting to anybody else than the person who wrote it. There can be many reasons. The practical availability or licensing of the work is the most common one. It is great that google has an amazing implementation of whatever state of the art algorithm. It is not much use to anybody else if they can't read…

I would argue that being the first open source variant of a common commercial product is an interesting differentiator. But if there's already an open source version just being another open source one isn't interesting. This is exactly the kind of difference that we're talking about that make something not "just another". And if someone's doing a thing to learn then why is it being shared, how does that change how it…

> I often argue such things should be put in portfolios to show off skills,

Sure.

> This kind of academic or portfolio work is also clearly not what we're discussing because of course it has inherent value in just the creation.

You are no boss of mine, i discuss what i want. :p What you are saying here is exactly the point I am making. You only see the value of the software which is provided by its direct use. So much so that you don’t even want to discuss the alternative values and cide me for even bringing them up.

Imagine that you take steel bars and forge a garden fork out of it using blacksmithing techniques. There is value in that, in as much as the person who made it become a better craft person by doing so. Even if you can get a better fork at home depot for much cheaper.

> If you make it to do app and share it with me, I really don't care.

That is up to you. If you make a todo app and share it with me i will ask you what made you interested in making a todo app. But yeah a todo app is not a particularly inspiring thing in the grand scheme of things, so unless you are a very junior developer or you are trying some new technique you are unlikely to get much accolades for it.

But todo apps is not the only thing one can do. If you implement some cool artistic image filter, or write a process scheduler, or make an auto-router for pcb traces i will celebrate that with you even if there are better solutions out there. Because those are your “garden forks” and the skills you learned while making them can’t be taken away from you.

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#106

Post by ericjmorey »

zer00eyz wrote: post #55
jajko wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed if that's the response, you either have an acquaintance with 0 emotional intelligence that is by default like an elephant in porcelain shop in relationships, probably move on since its a lifelong effort to even just sustain such friendship. Or its an envious a-hole since such message is clearly denigrating, still lacks basic emotional intelligence, and then just run and don't look back. If I ever saw 2 women c…

The people closest to you are the ones who are supposed to be able to tell you that "you're wrong" in the least hurtful way. "Support everything I do blindly" is NOT what friends do its what sycophants do. Your friend is supposed to lift you up when your right, and tell you "you are being a moron" when your wrong.

This is black and white thinking and the reality is grey.

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#107

Post by chipsrafferty »

sqeaky wrote: post #73
krisoft wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> software that does nothing differently or better than the existing (well-known) solutions is just, well, not interesting to anybody else than the person who wrote it. There can be many reasons. The practical availability or licensing of the work is the most common one. It is great that google has an amazing implementation of whatever state of the art algorithm. It is not much use to anybody else if they can't read…

I would argue that being the first open source variant of a common commercial product is an interesting differentiator. But if there's already an open source version just being another open source one isn't interesting. This is exactly the kind of difference that we're talking about that make something not "just another". And if someone's doing a thing to learn then why is it being shared, how does that change how it…

Some people care, you know, about their friend's mastery and progression of some craft. Just because it may not be interesting to a random stranger (or it may be, if the story about the process is interesting and well written) does not mean it's not interesting to anyone.

Re: the open source, you know how often open source projects die because the maintainers get bored or busy or there's disagreement about the direction of the project? A fuckload. Having multiple open source projects that do the same thing - and let's be clear, nothing complex is ever exactly the same - is healthy. It means if they diverge in the future that you may prefer project A and detest the changes made in project B. If project B was the only one to exist, you'd be angry.

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#108

Post by Gigachad »

jp57 wrote: post #53
015a wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the better metaphor is: Imagine you make a chair over the weekend. You already have many chairs. Chairs are readily and cheaply available. Your design is likely derivative of many other chairs. Being told any of these things by a friend you show the chair to is entirely pointless and maybe even mean. The only angle that has some level of social acceptability is an angle like "check out this chair that's like…

I'd say software is more like a pie recipe or a song than like a pie or a chair.

Software is more like the chair design/assembly instructions. It can be trivially replicated an infinite number of times.

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#109

Post by AtlasBarfed »

jp57 wrote: post #22

As others have mentioned, a pie is consumable, and thus a good one has value even if it isn't original. But a slight change to the original scenario makes asking about originality much more reasonable: Imagine you write a peach pie recipe over the weekend, and you give a copy of the recipe to your friend. They respond: "Wait, how is this different from every other peach pie recipe that's ever been written? It seems r…

Yes, software is the recipe, not the pie

Re: Pie doesn't need to be original unless you claim it so

#110

Post by albedoa »

hnlmorg wrote: post #95
jp57 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, I'm in my 50s, I thought it was the kids who expected their friends to be uncritically accepting. This whole subthread spawned from one sentence where I asserted that I found it valuable when my friends would tell me if they thought my songs sounded too much like something else (and that they expected the same from me), as an illustration that there are contexts in which asking about originality is something th…

I wasn’t claiming people get confused about covers. But to be honest, I think we’ve both been missing each others point. For the sake of keeping things on topic, and also because I’m about to crack open a bottle of whisky, I’ll just leave the following comment: Your point about constructive feedback is an empowering one. And while I’m not sure I’ve understood the nuances of everything you’ve posted, I do 100% agree w…

> I think we’ve both been missing each others point.

This is so fucking gross. Nobody has been "missing" you. If you are truly sorry and willing to change, then the appropriate response is to own up to and apologize for intentionally misreading the person who you have wronged, not try to pass off blame to them.

Post reply on HN