Mastodon: @canpolat@hachyderm.io

  • 24 Posts
  • 42 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 20th, 2023

help-circle














  • This is great. I think “instance post/comment links” would be a great addition to Lemmy core in general, but don’t know how easy it would be to implement. What I have in mind is: when someone provides a link to a post/comment in another instance, it would be converted to a link the person is logged in from. I think it would be OK to leave the link as is but add an icon next to it that goes to the correct URL for that instance.

















  • I didn’t read it as lamenting the demise of the tinkerer. But it can of course be read that way too.

    I guess many people find themselves in the article. I, for one, spent way too many nights building “under construction” web sites on Geocities. However, I definitely don’t think “passion” has anything to do with what we do (Searls also makes fun of being passionate about passion). I don’t find that to be a sustainable approach. I don’t care if a candidate I’m interviewing has personal projects in Github or a Raspberry Pi at home. Those are interesting, sure, but no more than playing the guitar or swimming.

    Again, maybe the article was not well balanced. And maybe the fact that I find myself in the article prevents me from seeing it.


  • What you did with the message queu in Javascript is impressive. And I’m sure there are other efforts that solved “impossible” problems in creative ways. Creativity is important in a lot of professions and I can admit that it is probably more important in programming than, say, accounting (I hear “creative accounting” is not a good thing). However, I don’t think creativity is vital in what we do. It’s useful, sure. But, for example, it’s not as important as critical thinking. I think the real problem is that we are a relatively new engineering discipline that is still under rapid change. The paradox is, if we look at the programming paradigms, we don’t actually see many new things. We reheat the stuff from 60s/70s all the time (functional programming is a good example). But the socio-technical aspects of what we do (and how we do it) is under constant change (waterfall, agile, autonomy, etc.). And, this is probably what makes software unique. We have a very short feedback loop (as opposed to building a bridge). And I would say, that should also have its place in education.

    This talk by Dave Farley sums up my thoughts about “software engineering” quite well: Taking Back “Software Engineering” – Craftsmanship is Insufficient (Piped link).


  • When I saw the title, I thought “just another blog on 10x developer”. I don’t really know why I decided to read on, but I’m happy I did. Searls touches on many more while investigating the topic. The writer approaches the topic from a inter-generational point of view and also goes in to things like “passion” and “craftsmanship”. I would even say, this is not about the 10x developer at all. This is about how as a young engineering discipline we are still trying to find better ways of doing things.

    It’s an open secret that the industry has no idea how to teach people to program. Computer Science degrees famously don’t prepare programmers for the job of programming, which has always been left as an exercise to the student to figure out on their own time. If the industry is going to outlive us enthusiast programmers, will it adopt a sustainable approach to educating the next generation that doesn’t require people to teach themselves everything?