It's not people who try and can't hack it who I'm talking about. It's the people who want to be where I am without expending any extra effort. When people say "man, I wish I could do that," it often--not always, but often--has an unspoken "without having to work any harder than I am now" caveat.
Excellent post, and I agree 100%. Most really good programmers I know don't really spend a lot of time interacting with people, either on projects or off. It's not my own strong suit, by nature. But I learned pretty early on that it was what you had to do, so I made up my mind to consciously attempt to improve that skill. You may not follow what they say, but you should always listen to it.
The willingness to talk and discuss a problem is something that's been cited as something that one of my clients (a repeat customer) likes. I don't try to tell them what they need and how to go about it, I let them elaborate on what they need, asking the questions that will lead me to a firm grasp of the problem, and then I tailor a solution to the problem rather than having a solution already in mind from the start.
I agree with you entirely. That said, if they can't hack it, they shouldn't still be here. I've suggested to good friends of mine that they try something else because despite spending a ton of time with tutors, professors, and in one case most of a semester of me and him staying up till 2AM with a whiteboard and a computer projector, they just don't Get It. The ones that didn't get it and have switched majors are far happier, and will still graduate on time.
I'm not saying that this stuff is easy. I am saying that if it's worth doing, it's not worth half-assing. Some things you might want to do, you have to bust ass at. I'm not an innately good musician. But when I decide I'm going to do something, I throw myself into it and work as hard as I can possibly manage to break through. Do I fail? Of course, sometimes I fail. Everybody does. But when it comes to something like this, if you don't get it by junior year, you're not going to get it, and you shouldn't still be there.
You're probably talented and driven, but you also have a computer engineer for a father who helped you get started early and seems to cover your expenses so you don't waste time with a work-study job.
My father let me play with one of his machines, yeah. I don't discount that. But I got started with writing code while playing in the computer labs during school when I was in second grade.
But as for work-study? Man, I'm at my work-study job right now.;-)
If they didn't want to code, why are they computer science majors? By now they've had three years to change majors if they couldn't hack (pun intended) it.
You're still on the hook for distributing the source code for the Covered Work and any Modifications. And you're free to distribute the binaries of the Covered Work however you please, so long as its source code is distributed under the CDDL. So, in *that* regard, it's identical to the GPL.
Yes. However, this is, unlike the GPL, a quid pro quo. Your stuff remains your stuff. Changes to the "public stuff", however, must be shared. "We gave you this, so if you make it better, you need to share it back." The GPL is "we gave you this, so give us everything you do." That's not fair.
WRT the "arrogance" of GPL users: I use the GPL for my own work 'cause I want to see a self-perpetuating body of high-quality [0] work that anyone [1] can pick through and take parts from. You're free to not use my code.
I'm referring more to the shit pulled by the zealots. The ones who take BSD code and refuse to contribute back upstream, locking up changes as GPL in perpetuity. The ones who think that there's an ethical requirement to release code under the GPL.
I do think there's arrogance in the GPL. It's the furthest thing from quid pro quo--it's quodque pro quo. It's not something-for-something, it's everything-for-something. But I in no way think you shouldn't be allowed to use it.
You're also free to take my code, compile it, and sell the result at any price.:)
Come on now, man. This is disingenuous for obvious reasons and I think you know it. I think we can be above such in this discussion, can't we?
.
I think the best way to describe my feeling is this: the GPL espouses a philosophy. CDDL, BSD, etc. espouse getting shit done. (If you watch Revolution OS, there's a bit in it where Stallman actually says that advocacy is as important as making good code.)
How do you feel about the LGPL?
My dislike of the LGPL is mostly based on its being run by the FSF, who I despise. The ability to rebrand code as GPL is also disturbing because it allows for what amounts to locking up code licensed under the LGPL--restricting me from using your changes to my code. This violates quid pro quo.
I guess the best way to describe it is this: if you want your code to be freely available for anyone to use, sure (BSD, MIT, etc.). If you want your code to be used on a quid quo pro basis, great (MPL, CDDL). If you want to lay claim on everyone else's stuff just so they can use yours...sorry, you lost me.
I don't think there's anything wrong with a 3.62 at all. I didn't mean to imply that. If I wasn't working on my own stuff, it'd probably be two-tenths higher. But the kids rocking 3.9's and 4.0's, that "top five percent" in grades? They're clueless. Absorb the book material, spit it back out on exams, forget it after. It's all rote, there's no intuition and no skill.
There's one guy in my classes who is to me as I am to most of the rest of the class; he's miles ahead of me. Dude's got a 2.6 GPA and has abilities that make me feel incompetent.
Yes, I was writing batch scripts and other crap. It's not hard. I've taught my little brother how to write the equivalents in Python. What's your point?
See, that's possible. And I thought about it before writing my first post. But what does highly driven, self-starting behavior look like? Should you not be expecting excellence from yourself and, by extension, from those around you? Should you not be giving 100% in everything you do?
The narcissists that the original post were talking about are the people who don't have skills nor experience, yet expect to be treated like they do, expect a gold star for average work. I expect nothing to be handed to me. I pound the pavement for consulting gigs, and I've worked very hard to build up a resume that's worth being jazzed about, and to put myself into a position to succeed at starting my own business. Whether I'll succeed at that or not, I don't know, but unlike most of my peers, I know failure won't be because I half-assed it. And if that doesn't work out, will I have to work in the trenches and move up the ladder? Of course. That's how it works.
And there's the problem. Ability is nothing without putting the work behind it. Sure, you taught yourself this and that, and sure, you do some nice little projects on the side, but without a tolerance for mundane, sometimes seemingly pointless (sometimes truly pointless) work, you'll just be another narcissistic college graduate.
No, I'll be working for myself. Pointless projects stop being pointless when they're for you.:-)
On a tangential note, I'm seeing a lot of ego here. Lot's of people saying they're skilled, or experienced, or (most likely) both. Anyone here feel that they're only average at what they do? Don't look at me, though. I am an exceptional bachelor of maths student, and I just know it.;)
You sound a little defensive. Seeing your peers blow by you because they actually worked hard?
While you're spending all your time in front of the keyboard becoming a non-provable top 5% (busy work is boring to you - but grades are important to employers),
Having an excellent resume is more important. I have GSoC with Novell and Google on my resume, and if things go the way they're going I'll have an internship with Microsoft Research and possibly a third SoC under my belt. I also have fifteen references I can put on a resume for high-quality work in both independent contracting and employer/employee settings.
I've never been asked for my GPA.
prob the rest of the class are out drinking, having fun and getting laid.
Wherever in my post did I even begin to hint that I wasn't "out drinking, having fun and getting laid"? Because all three activities are pretty regular for me. I have fun as I work--one hundred percent. I'm a musician and I play regularly (keyboards, bass) with a group of 4-5 people--not gigs, yet, as we're not quite there yet, but probably starting this summer. I write. I cook. I bartend on the side, which is a lot of fun (not so much anymore, though, it doesn't pay as well and my old place closed down). I play intramural sports. I'm out there doing more than the CS students who aren't learning their craft and bettering themselves. The ones who don't do shit are certainly not out drinking, having fun and getting laid. They're playing WoW.
Actually, no, I don't, because the GPL is fucking cretinous (the CDDL is a far superior license if you want to ensure that your code remains open, without assuming the arrogance to dictate what others' code shall be; the BSD license is superior to the both of them).
There was no special trait about Bill Gates that led him to the riches he has today, unless hard work (like it or not, the guy has spent a lot of time and effort to get where he is today) and knowing when a good opportunity was passing his way (hello, QDOS!) are somehow special traits.
A virtuous man ensures fairness of opportunity, not fairness of outcome. Attempting to create a fairness of outcome--in other words, creating the expectation that the world owes you something--is the first step toward a terminally fucked society.
Clearly you misunderstood his post. Working for free for a "decent chance" of it paying off "eventually" is not good business sense in any way, shape, or form.
I'm a college CS junior. I am in the top 5% in my class in ability (grades are another matter, busywork annoys me). Whenever there's a group project, people are beelining to work with me, because I have demonstrated programming skills, project management ability, and the ability to break down problems to be easily understood by others.
I don't mean to brag when I say this, but rather explore a perspective. I heard this a lot: "man, I wish I could work like you do."
And I ask--why the fuck can't they?
I'm nothing special, I've just been using computers and programming for a long time. I learned BASIC when I was 7. Not to just print "HELLO WORLD" on the screen, but to do stuff. I figured out Hello World and how to generate random numbers - let's make a slot machine program! That works? What about graphics, turning it from ASCII to some 16-color awesomeness? That works? What about adding sound? And I was doing it on my own. I didn't have any teachers. My dad's a network engineer, but he doesn't know how to program--I was writing small processing apps for him in Java and Visual Basic when I was 11. Identify the problem, find a solution, implement the solution. And since I have that body of experience, today in college I can get away with paying only half a mind to my studies. I've been doing it so long that it's innate. I don't have to think about it, I just do it, and the process of adding more tools to my toolbox via academic study just happens naturally. (These days I spend my spare time learning new things that aren't necessarily programming-related. I picked up a MIDI keyboard and a bass guitar four months ago and started making electronic music. I can afford to branch out because I know my core stuff so thoroughly.)
But what about the other students I mentioned? Most aren't programming in their spare time. Most came to school having had one or two high school programming classes and thought that was enough. They weren't learning outside of class. They still don't. Do the bare minimum of the homework, forget how all of it worked as soon as you finish the exam on the material. (A guy today asked me how to do string matching in Java. He's a senior graduating this semester. He's had four classes where Java was the assigned language.)
And it shows. No drive, no attention to detail. Some of them get internships as a company's PHP monkey or whatever, and they brag about it.
Me? I do their jobs in 2-3 weeks as a consultant and leave the client with something they don't need a webmaster for. I've done Google Summer of Code twice, with two very different groups, and am looking at doing it again--not really for the money, but just to broaden my horizons, to get into new fields of development and to learn more about my craft. I'm starting my own software-service company in May, with an estimated customer base of 60-80 clients already (thanks to networking, getting out and meeting people, not being a goddamn mushroom in a basement) and an estimated first-month after-tax profit of $8,800--which doesn't sound like a lot until you realize it's being run out of my apartment, on a sliding margin, without a dime of my own money invested in the enterprise, while living in a state where the median income is $25,000 per capita.
My generation is afflicted entitlement mentalities and an aversion to actually doing anything to better themselves. It's sad.
No, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that it's probably cheaper to pay a quarter mill for FAT than commission programmers to write and adequately test an ext2/ext3 driver.
There's also the fact that ext3 is not trivial to implement and that it's far cheaper and easier to use FAT, as it's already there. If you think an ext3 IFS driver, properly developed and tested, will be less than a quarter million dollars, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
Actually, I'd say he had a good point, if you look beyond the obviously tongue-in-cheek remark. "Grotesque metamorphosis"? Come on now. This shit is somewhat important (personally, I'd just say don't use their services if you don't like 'em, but hey), but nobody will take you seriously if you sound like a whining drama queen.
Second Life only generates a profit (and a slim one) because their users can't do math.
(Not a troll--I've done some programming work for people in SL, and it's a neat concept. But they're only making money on the margins, and they're poor margins.)
Slashdot Mirror
It's not people who try and can't hack it who I'm talking about. It's the people who want to be where I am without expending any extra effort. When people say "man, I wish I could do that," it often--not always, but often--has an unspoken "without having to work any harder than I am now" caveat.
Excellent post, and I agree 100%. Most really good programmers I know don't really spend a lot of time interacting with people, either on projects or off. It's not my own strong suit, by nature. But I learned pretty early on that it was what you had to do, so I made up my mind to consciously attempt to improve that skill. You may not follow what they say, but you should always listen to it.
The willingness to talk and discuss a problem is something that's been cited as something that one of my clients (a repeat customer) likes. I don't try to tell them what they need and how to go about it, I let them elaborate on what they need, asking the questions that will lead me to a firm grasp of the problem, and then I tailor a solution to the problem rather than having a solution already in mind from the start.
I agree with you entirely. That said, if they can't hack it, they shouldn't still be here. I've suggested to good friends of mine that they try something else because despite spending a ton of time with tutors, professors, and in one case most of a semester of me and him staying up till 2AM with a whiteboard and a computer projector, they just don't Get It. The ones that didn't get it and have switched majors are far happier, and will still graduate on time.
I'm not saying that this stuff is easy. I am saying that if it's worth doing, it's not worth half-assing. Some things you might want to do, you have to bust ass at. I'm not an innately good musician. But when I decide I'm going to do something, I throw myself into it and work as hard as I can possibly manage to break through. Do I fail? Of course, sometimes I fail. Everybody does. But when it comes to something like this, if you don't get it by junior year, you're not going to get it, and you shouldn't still be there.
You're probably talented and driven, but you also have a computer engineer for a father who helped you get started early and seems to cover your expenses so you don't waste time with a work-study job.
My father let me play with one of his machines, yeah. I don't discount that. But I got started with writing code while playing in the computer labs during school when I was in second grade.
But as for work-study? Man, I'm at my work-study job right now. ;-)
If they didn't want to code, why are they computer science majors? By now they've had three years to change majors if they couldn't hack (pun intended) it.
You're still on the hook for distributing the source code for the Covered Work and any Modifications. And you're free to distribute the binaries of the Covered Work however you please, so long as its source code is distributed under the CDDL. So, in *that* regard, it's identical to the GPL.
Yes. However, this is, unlike the GPL, a quid pro quo. Your stuff remains your stuff. Changes to the "public stuff", however, must be shared. "We gave you this, so if you make it better, you need to share it back." The GPL is "we gave you this, so give us everything you do." That's not fair.
WRT the "arrogance" of GPL users:
I use the GPL for my own work 'cause I want to see a self-perpetuating body of high-quality [0] work that anyone [1] can pick through and take parts from. You're free to not use my code.
I'm referring more to the shit pulled by the zealots. The ones who take BSD code and refuse to contribute back upstream, locking up changes as GPL in perpetuity. The ones who think that there's an ethical requirement to release code under the GPL.
I do think there's arrogance in the GPL. It's the furthest thing from quid pro quo--it's quodque pro quo. It's not something-for-something, it's everything-for-something. But I in no way think you shouldn't be allowed to use it.
You're also free to take my code, compile it, and sell the result at any price. :)
Come on now, man. This is disingenuous for obvious reasons and I think you know it. I think we can be above such in this discussion, can't we?
.
I think the best way to describe my feeling is this: the GPL espouses a philosophy. CDDL, BSD, etc. espouse getting shit done. (If you watch Revolution OS, there's a bit in it where Stallman actually says that advocacy is as important as making good code.)
How do you feel about the LGPL?
My dislike of the LGPL is mostly based on its being run by the FSF, who I despise. The ability to rebrand code as GPL is also disturbing because it allows for what amounts to locking up code licensed under the LGPL--restricting me from using your changes to my code. This violates quid pro quo.
I guess the best way to describe it is this: if you want your code to be freely available for anyone to use, sure (BSD, MIT, etc.). If you want your code to be used on a quid quo pro basis, great (MPL, CDDL). If you want to lay claim on everyone else's stuff just so they can use yours...sorry, you lost me.
I don't think there's anything wrong with a 3.62 at all. I didn't mean to imply that. If I wasn't working on my own stuff, it'd probably be two-tenths higher. But the kids rocking 3.9's and 4.0's, that "top five percent" in grades? They're clueless. Absorb the book material, spit it back out on exams, forget it after. It's all rote, there's no intuition and no skill.
There's one guy in my classes who is to me as I am to most of the rest of the class; he's miles ahead of me. Dude's got a 2.6 GPA and has abilities that make me feel incompetent.
Yes, I was writing batch scripts and other crap. It's not hard. I've taught my little brother how to write the equivalents in Python. What's your point?
See, that's possible. And I thought about it before writing my first post. But what does highly driven, self-starting behavior look like? Should you not be expecting excellence from yourself and, by extension, from those around you? Should you not be giving 100% in everything you do?
The narcissists that the original post were talking about are the people who don't have skills nor experience, yet expect to be treated like they do, expect a gold star for average work. I expect nothing to be handed to me. I pound the pavement for consulting gigs, and I've worked very hard to build up a resume that's worth being jazzed about, and to put myself into a position to succeed at starting my own business. Whether I'll succeed at that or not, I don't know, but unlike most of my peers, I know failure won't be because I half-assed it. And if that doesn't work out, will I have to work in the trenches and move up the ladder? Of course. That's how it works.
And there's the problem. Ability is nothing without putting the work behind it. Sure, you taught yourself this and that, and sure, you do some nice little projects on the side, but without a tolerance for mundane, sometimes seemingly pointless (sometimes truly pointless) work, you'll just be another narcissistic college graduate.
No, I'll be working for myself. Pointless projects stop being pointless when they're for you. :-)
On a tangential note, I'm seeing a lot of ego here. Lot's of people saying they're skilled, or experienced, or (most likely) both. Anyone here feel that they're only average at what they do? Don't look at me, though. I am an exceptional bachelor of maths student, and I just know it. ;)
I am the world's most average keyboardist. ;-)
My GPA is 3.62. It's never come up on in any interview.
You sound a little defensive. Seeing your peers blow by you because they actually worked hard?
While you're spending all your time in front of the keyboard becoming a non-provable top 5% (busy work is boring to you - but grades are important to employers),
Having an excellent resume is more important. I have GSoC with Novell and Google on my resume, and if things go the way they're going I'll have an internship with Microsoft Research and possibly a third SoC under my belt. I also have fifteen references I can put on a resume for high-quality work in both independent contracting and employer/employee settings.
I've never been asked for my GPA.
prob the rest of the class are out drinking, having fun and getting laid.
Wherever in my post did I even begin to hint that I wasn't "out drinking, having fun and getting laid"? Because all three activities are pretty regular for me. I have fun as I work--one hundred percent. I'm a musician and I play regularly (keyboards, bass) with a group of 4-5 people--not gigs, yet, as we're not quite there yet, but probably starting this summer. I write. I cook. I bartend on the side, which is a lot of fun (not so much anymore, though, it doesn't pay as well and my old place closed down). I play intramural sports. I'm out there doing more than the CS students who aren't learning their craft and bettering themselves. The ones who don't do shit are certainly not out drinking, having fun and getting laid. They're playing WoW.
Except that I am out drinking, having fun, and getting laid. I'm also making a nice chunk of change while I do it. :)
I couldn't in good conscience vote for either of 'em. Obama too clueless, McCain too pandering to the religious crazies.
Hope you can convince those four folks to sue.
Actually, no, I don't, because the GPL is fucking cretinous (the CDDL is a far superior license if you want to ensure that your code remains open, without assuming the arrogance to dictate what others' code shall be; the BSD license is superior to the both of them).
There was no special trait about Bill Gates that led him to the riches he has today, unless hard work (like it or not, the guy has spent a lot of time and effort to get where he is today) and knowing when a good opportunity was passing his way (hello, QDOS!) are somehow special traits.
A virtuous man ensures fairness of opportunity, not fairness of outcome. Attempting to create a fairness of outcome--in other words, creating the expectation that the world owes you something--is the first step toward a terminally fucked society.
Clearly you misunderstood his post. Working for free for a "decent chance" of it paying off "eventually" is not good business sense in any way, shape, or form.
This is so many kinds of true.
I'm a college CS junior. I am in the top 5% in my class in ability (grades are another matter, busywork annoys me). Whenever there's a group project, people are beelining to work with me, because I have demonstrated programming skills, project management ability, and the ability to break down problems to be easily understood by others.
I don't mean to brag when I say this, but rather explore a perspective. I heard this a lot: "man, I wish I could work like you do."
And I ask--why the fuck can't they?
I'm nothing special, I've just been using computers and programming for a long time. I learned BASIC when I was 7. Not to just print "HELLO WORLD" on the screen, but to do stuff. I figured out Hello World and how to generate random numbers - let's make a slot machine program! That works? What about graphics, turning it from ASCII to some 16-color awesomeness? That works? What about adding sound? And I was doing it on my own. I didn't have any teachers. My dad's a network engineer, but he doesn't know how to program--I was writing small processing apps for him in Java and Visual Basic when I was 11. Identify the problem, find a solution, implement the solution. And since I have that body of experience, today in college I can get away with paying only half a mind to my studies. I've been doing it so long that it's innate. I don't have to think about it, I just do it, and the process of adding more tools to my toolbox via academic study just happens naturally. (These days I spend my spare time learning new things that aren't necessarily programming-related. I picked up a MIDI keyboard and a bass guitar four months ago and started making electronic music. I can afford to branch out because I know my core stuff so thoroughly.)
But what about the other students I mentioned? Most aren't programming in their spare time. Most came to school having had one or two high school programming classes and thought that was enough. They weren't learning outside of class. They still don't. Do the bare minimum of the homework, forget how all of it worked as soon as you finish the exam on the material. (A guy today asked me how to do string matching in Java. He's a senior graduating this semester. He's had four classes where Java was the assigned language.)
And it shows. No drive, no attention to detail. Some of them get internships as a company's PHP monkey or whatever, and they brag about it.
Me? I do their jobs in 2-3 weeks as a consultant and leave the client with something they don't need a webmaster for. I've done Google Summer of Code twice, with two very different groups, and am looking at doing it again--not really for the money, but just to broaden my horizons, to get into new fields of development and to learn more about my craft. I'm starting my own software-service company in May, with an estimated customer base of 60-80 clients already (thanks to networking, getting out and meeting people, not being a goddamn mushroom in a basement) and an estimated first-month after-tax profit of $8,800--which doesn't sound like a lot until you realize it's being run out of my apartment, on a sliding margin, without a dime of my own money invested in the enterprise, while living in a state where the median income is $25,000 per capita.
My generation is afflicted entitlement mentalities and an aversion to actually doing anything to better themselves. It's sad.
No, but you seem to be ignoring the fact that it's probably cheaper to pay a quarter mill for FAT than commission programmers to write and adequately test an ext2/ext3 driver.
It makes very little business sense.
There's also the fact that ext3 is not trivial to implement and that it's far cheaper and easier to use FAT, as it's already there. If you think an ext3 IFS driver, properly developed and tested, will be less than a quarter million dollars, I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.
That, and it's pretty much universal, (almost) everything from Amiga to Windows can use FAT.
Come on, you could have gone with z/OS and gotten extra points here.
Ext2IFS isn't very good, though, and IIRC that's the main ext* FS driver on Windows.
They're a bunch of anarcho-communist tards, they've got no money to take.
Their parents who run their trust funds might, though.
Actually, I'd say he had a good point, if you look beyond the obviously tongue-in-cheek remark. "Grotesque metamorphosis"? Come on now. This shit is somewhat important (personally, I'd just say don't use their services if you don't like 'em, but hey), but nobody will take you seriously if you sound like a whining drama queen.
Second Life only generates a profit (and a slim one) because their users can't do math.
(Not a troll--I've done some programming work for people in SL, and it's a neat concept. But they're only making money on the margins, and they're poor margins.)