Live data from Hacker News

Don't Reinvent the Wheel

oscargodson.posterous.com

51–60 of 71 posts

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#51

In the context of startups, I think reinventing the wheel makes sense when it's your primary product and you can do better than what's out there. Most of the examples listed in the article fit this. If it's what you spend all day thinking about and working on, you're probably better suited to reinvent it than anybody else. Reinventing the wheel doesn't make as much sense for something that isn't your core product. Fo…

100% agree and a point I was trying to make. This whole thing was a response to a reply to a comment I made. I had made a comment that the library they were doing a tutorial on was stupid because it could be done better and I could do it better. They then told me not to reinvent the wheel since it was already done by "geniuses". But yes, exactly.

I use jQuery, but I usually write my own plugins. Id never been able to write a library like jQuery on my own, or in any reasonable time frame, but I can write a slideshow for example in the same amount of time it takes me to find one that works for the project, read through the docs, read the API and implement it. But to some, and some past clients, thats stupid and im "reinventing the wheel."

Thanks for the comment!

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#52
post #15

It's nitpicky, but the second time I saw "itself" written as "it's self" I cringed extra-hard.

Its a good point but less relevant to the discussion than some of the other comments here, and currently has 3x the points of all other posts in this thread. Don't just upvote just because you agree, upvote because a post contributes to the discussion!

Thanks! I don't read Hacker News often and when I heard the article was here and 2 of the top comments were about my grammar I thought "and that's why I never read Hacker News". I was actually excited to see some discussion around the subject matter. I was pretty disappointed by all the talk about my "engrish".

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#53
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a good point but less relevant to the discussion than some of the other comments here, and currently has 3x the points of all other posts in this thread. Don't just upvote just because you agree, upvote because a post contributes to the discussion!

My mother tongue is not English, but such silly errors are inexcusable. It takes a second to google the correct form. In fact, "it's self" put me off completely and I never completed the article. So, IMHO, good spelling and grammar are essential to any discussion.

Are you kidding me? You use IMHO and correct me on grammar?

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#54
post #18

It's nitpicky, but the second time I saw "itself" written as "it's self" I cringed extra-hard.

Why? You knew precisely what he meant, which is the whole point of English.

I agree :) and yes, but apparently because I spelled itself like it's self they were too stupid to read the article. Funny how many of these people can read code, but can't figure out what I meant from it's self.

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#55
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its a good point but less relevant to the discussion than some of the other comments here, and currently has 3x the points of all other posts in this thread. Don't just upvote just because you agree, upvote because a post contributes to the discussion!

I actually agree, and would probably downvote it if I saw it at +16 and it weren't my comment! (Actually, is there HN etiquette on that? If I think a comment is ok, but doesn't deserve to be as high up as it is, can I strategically downvote it? Or should I up/downvote comments without regard to their present score?)

pg supports strategic voting. http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2403753

You can flag (click the comment's "link" link).

Does criticizing a typo gratify one's intellectual curiosity? http://ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#57
post #56

The Wheel re-invented: http://boingboing.net/2009/12/18/sideways-rolling-omn.html And that is just an example. If your goal is to make money the exact same way the man before you made money, then do not re-invent the wheel. If you want to change the world, then try and make a better wheel.

They did not reinvent the wheel, they invented a new thing that reminds of a wheel. I can't believe we are actually arguing this post. Basically, it stems from the misuse of the word "reinvent" in the media instead of "revolutionize"

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#58
post #56

The Wheel re-invented: http://boingboing.net/2009/12/18/sideways-rolling-omn.html And that is just an example. If your goal is to make money the exact same way the man before you made money, then do not re-invent the wheel. If you want to change the world, then try and make a better wheel.

They did not reinvent the wheel, they invented a new thing that reminds of a wheel. I can't believe we are actually arguing this post. Basically, it stems from the misuse of the word "reinvent" in the media instead of "revolutionize"

You are right. That is a better way to think of it.

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#59

  For example, in programming there is a wide-spread 1st order theory
  that one shouldn't build one's own tools, languages, and especially 
  operating systems. This is true — an incredible amount of time and
  energy has gone down these ratholes. On the 2nd hand, if you can build
  your own tools, languages and operating systems, then you *absolutely
  should* because the leverage that can be obtained (and often the time
  not wasted in trying to fix other people's not quite right tools) can be
  incredible.
Alan Kay http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:fPHDWbw... http://www.viewpointsresearch.org/pdf/m2004001_power.pdf

Re: Don't Reinvent the Wheel

#60
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not so sure... When a blog post has basic grammatical/spelling errors, it means that the writer didn't bother to do any significant copy-editing. If the author can't take the time to copy-edit their post, why should we take the time to read it? The presence of obvious errors sends a signal that either the author's thoughts are disorganized, or he doesn't take them seriously enough to make sure they're expressed c…

1. This was a response to a reply from a comment I made on a blog. 2. My grandmother has a Ph.D in linguistics and knows probably a dozen languages. Boy would it be hilarious for you to talk to her. I can't even mention how many times I've talked to her about how spelling and grammar doesn't matter as long as the point and idea is conveyed and UNDERSTOOD. She's even against spelling out of things like "though" and ap…

Hey Oscar, thanks for replying.

I'd like to address your third point right off the bat, since it's the most important one: I didn't read your blog post. I stopped reading it after you spelled "itself" as "it's self". And, just like you said, it's because your grammar put me off. It's not that big of a deal to me, and shouldn't be to you, if you never intended anyone to read your post except for the person you were replying to. But if that was the case, why put it on a blog? If you want your blog posts to have the widest possible appeal, you should use standard spelling and grammar. It looks better, and it's easier to understand. No matter what your opinions on the relative importance of grammar, things like readability and aesthetic appeal matter. And if your work is not of a technical nature and is being published for a wide audience - like this blog post - they matter even more.

I'm not sure what to make of your point about your grandmother, since I'm sure you're aware that there are plenty of people with Ph.Ds in linguistics who would disagree with her intensely. I'm sure that a conversation with her would be interesting, and she might even change my mind, but the fact that she has a Ph.D wouldn't factor into it at all. My personal opinion is that spelling, grammar, and other elements of style are extremely important. The way that something is written has a major affect on the way it is received by the reader, and slight variations in word choice and spelling can change the actual semantic meaning of a sentence.

Using the "itself"/"it's self" thing as an example: Their meanings are not identical. "Itself" is often used as an apposition, which is how it would have been interpreted in the context of your sentence. "Its self", on the other hand, puts extra emphasis on the "self". Someone might legitimately want to spell it this way to emphasize both the phrase and "its self", which would be the phrase's characteristics. It doesn't read as an apposition, though, so the meaning is different. This gets right to the heart of what we're talking about: Using incorrect grammar has changed both the stylistic emphasis and the literal meaning of the sentence in such a way that makes it harder for the reader to understand. The reader shouldn't have to reconstruct what you meant to say out of what you actually said. (And, in any case, it would never be "it's self". Even following your grandmother's grammatical rules, you should have cut out the apostrophe entirely.)

As far as disorganized thoughts, that's fine when they're in your head, but when you put them on paper, you have to organize them. Organizing thoughts is what language is for.

Sorry for the looong post, but I wanted to make sure you understand me. I don't mean to attack you personally, but that seems to be how my comment was interpreted. A criticism of your writing is not a criticism of you. The main point I wanted to make is that style matters. It really, really, really does. I know you didn't necessarily mean for your post to climb to the top of Hacker News and get this level of scrutiny, but I hope you found the feedback useful. Don't take it too personally when someone criticizes something you write; it's just an opportunity to improve.

Post reply on HN