91–97 of 97 posts
He didn't say it's not worthwhile, on the contrary, Marco laments the loss to programmers and tech writing. What he said is that for him it's not worth the risk of putting himself out there: Some people claim that they don’t care and that they can ignore it. I don’t know if Joel can. I can’t, which is one of the reasons why I rarely write about programming: it’s just not worth the risk of putting myself out there on…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think there's a very similar dynamic at work in politics, where people self-identify as a particular party or supporter of a particular ideology, an then take any criticism, however mild" of that party or ideology as a personal attack upon their very identity.
pg has an essay about this very idea: http://www.paulgraham.com/identity.html
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's worth noting that Spolsky writes about programmers, not programming. Everything he says is opinion, and as a result, it tends to spawn a lot of critical comments. ("Your employer hates you if you don't have an Aeron chair." Maybe, maybe not.) Writing about programming -- techniques, thought processes, libraries, and code -- is highly valuable, at least in my opinion.
He's actually written quite a bit about programming, but over the years he's (naturally) shifted to writing more about the business of software development and how to run a software business. He's clearly opinionated, but his opinions are still valuable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's hard to leave a mischaracterization of your ideas unanswered on a forum where people know you participate. I don't worry what people say about me on other sites, because I don't even know what they're saying. But here I do know, and everyone knows I know. Which means in effect someone can call me out here, by phrasing a comment in such a way that if I don't respond it seems like it's because I have no response t…
It's hard to leave a mischaracterization of your ideas unanswered on a forum where people know you participate. Yes it is. And here's something I learned by accident... Many times I have been challenged by something I said. Often a great point, but just as often something totally illogical. I always felt compelled to engage immediately or else I'd look like I was acquiescing to the other. Then a strange thing happene…
Comments are disproportionately critical and/or argumentative, but that's because it's a waste of bandwidth to post a comment saying, "I agree!" That's what the up-arrow is for.
Blogs don't usually have up arrows.
"... He has outlasted the relevance of all of them. His first articles would have been frontpaged on whatever came before Slashdot. ..." Not quite true. Slashdot is from about '96 and JOS is from about 1999-2000. Could the real reason be a bit simpler as suggested Joel is running out of new ideas? Is it possible the upcoming IPO might also play part? "... I can’t, which is one of the reasons why I rarely write about…
> Not quite true. Slashdot is from about '96 I think you’re misreading. The author was saying that Joel’s posts would have been just as relevant before slashdot as they are today, not that the posts actually predate slashdot.
Point taken. Misleading though.