Professionalism is for Amateurs • Hacker News Board

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#21

Post by kragen » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 2:11 PM UTC

Philip Greenspun's old article on professionalism, from 2000: http://philip.greenspun.com/ancient-history/professionalism-...

> Curious to know what his definition of software engineering professionalism was after four years of MIT education, we probed a bit deeper and established that the way that he thought about professionalism did not differ from the thinking of a Mary Kay cosmetics saleswoman: wear nice clothes, drive a clean car, and don't say anything that might offend anyone.

Philip may be hard to work with, but he's a great writer.

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#22

Post by gm » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 2:35 PM UTC

@jk215: This is junk. Did you consult your dictionary before you wrote this? It makes it look like you do not know what you are talking about. Here is a definition:

professional standards: the skill, competence, or character expected of a member of a highly trained profession

use of professionals: the use of professionals instead of amateurs

Maybe you mean "beaureaucrats", or some other word; but not "professionals"

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#23

Post by sausagefeet » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 2:36 PM UTC

I think what the author is really getting at is 'amateurs' tend to be people who are in it for the love and excitement of what they do and 'professionals' tend to see what they are doing just as a job.

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#24

Post by rglover » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 2:43 PM UTC

ekidd wrote: post #13

Without defining "professionalism", this is a useless discussion. Professionalism, to me, implies a certain standard of conduct: Delivering what you promise, when you promise it. Communicating clearly. Refusing unethical requests. Not flaking out at a critical moment. Keeping your cool even when you're a bit frustrated. Refraining from conduct that will discredit your employer, clients or partners. Being clear about…

I think your definition is spot on. To say that "professionalism" merely entails putting on a suit and speaking in a certain way is a poor articulation of the term. I can see where the author is coming from, but there could have been a lot less fanatical talk (e.g. Google this and Steve Jobs that) and a lot more insight on the value of skirting the traditional concept of professionalism.

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#25

Post by bioh42_2 » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 2:51 PM UTC

gm wrote: post #22

@jk215: This is junk. Did you consult your dictionary before you wrote this? It makes it look like you do not know what you are talking about. Here is a definition: professional standards: the skill, competence, or character expected of a member of a highly trained profession use of professionals: the use of professionals instead of amateurs Maybe you mean "beaureaucrats", or some other word; but not "professionals"

He most definitely means bureaucrats, and I bet he owns a dictionary. But that would have been a reasonable title, and not a link bait. And if it is not link bait who will read it!

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#26

Post by rglover » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 2:53 PM UTC

grammaton wrote: post #20

This whole thing is a strawman. The author sets up a false dichotomy - either passionate amateur, or indifferent professional - and goes from there. Here's a thought - how about someone who's a passionate professional?

"passionate professional" -- nailed it.

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#27

Post by ctdonath » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 3:32 PM UTC

ekidd wrote: post #13

Without defining "professionalism", this is a useless discussion. Professionalism, to me, implies a certain standard of conduct: Delivering what you promise, when you promise it. Communicating clearly. Refusing unethical requests. Not flaking out at a critical moment. Keeping your cool even when you're a bit frustrated. Refraining from conduct that will discredit your employer, clients or partners. Being clear about…

Underdiscussed:

The amateur does the job when and how he sees fit. The professional does the job when and how the client requires.

Passion may exist in either. What one does when there is not passion makes the difference.

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#28

Post by ujeezy » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 4:48 PM UTC

Reminds me of an old pg essay: http://www.paulgraham.com/opensource.html

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#29

Post by rhizome » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 4:55 PM UTC

bioh42_2 wrote: post #25

gm wrote: post #22

@jk215: This is junk. Did you consult your dictionary before you wrote this? It makes it look like you do not know what you are talking about. Here is a definition: professional standards: the skill, competence, or character expected of a member of a highly trained profession use of professionals: the use of professionals instead of amateurs Maybe you mean "beaureaucrats", or some other word; but not "professionals"

He most definitely means bureaucrats, and I bet he owns a dictionary. But that would have been a reasonable title, and not a link bait. And if it is not link bait who will read it!

Which is why I read the comments for linkbait-y titles before giving them the clicks. I just wish HN made this possible to do from RSS.

Re: Professionalism is for Amateurs

#30

Post by helwr » Fri, Mar 18, 2011, 5:29 PM UTC

ekidd wrote: post #13

Without defining "professionalism", this is a useless discussion. Professionalism, to me, implies a certain standard of conduct: Delivering what you promise, when you promise it. Communicating clearly. Refusing unethical requests. Not flaking out at a critical moment. Keeping your cool even when you're a bit frustrated. Refraining from conduct that will discredit your employer, clients or partners. Being clear about…

The opposite of amateur is expert.