Stallman actually thinks that information can be divided up into a small number of categories that have different rules apply to them. I rather agree with him and the categories he's chosen. Though, since he tries hard to make sure all of his public statements are focused on the idea of Free Software, it's difficult to find his statements about other kinds of information.
I often wonder if the inventors of other world changing inventions (like the airplane, satellites, radio, TV, penicillin etc) thought of themselves with the glowing self praise that software engineers seem to do.
In my opinion, all of those inventions even taken together have a small fraction of the importance of software. Software is the art of arranging matter so that it interacts with itself and the rest of the world in a manner designed to accomplish a specific purpose. All technology, any invention at all, can be thought of as software. It's all figuring out new and novel ways of programming matter to do things we find useful.
As for my own ego... I feel that I am a better than average programmer. Significantly better. But, I also know that many programmers feel that way, and they can't all be right. In the end, I don't really care how good a programmer I am as long as what I make is useful to others and largely works. And that's pretty much how I feel about other programmers as well.
So, while I take pride in working with a technology that I feel is extremely important, I would be happy working with it even if I didn't feel it was that important.
I apologize if you felt I was attacking you. Really it was a comment about the IT industry as a whole.
It seeems that we are great and standing around and admiring ou work. Whilst ignoring the fact that 90% of it is delivered late, over-budget or lacking required functionality.
Sure we do some great stuffbut out of all the code written in the last 20 years I can only think of a few examples that have seriously impacted normal peoples lives (and less examples that are free).
I think that software designed with a grand, overarching plan is doomed to failure. I think the best software starts small, and grows with the needs of the people who use it.
Small software affects people's lives in important ways all the time. I think LJ is a great example. LJ is not small now, but it started that way. The people who make it have had to grow the software, and be very careful about the features they add and how they work lest they destroy the community. I think LJ, and things like it, are having a huge impact on people's ability to create and maintain social networks.
For example, I think because of LJ I will be able to build a network of friends here in Seattle within a couple of years that would've taken me 10 years to build before something like LJ. That's not a small impact. And it's an impact that relies on things like Apache, Linux, perl, and XML that don't seem to have any obvious effect on the lives of the average person.
But, I agree, software people could get a lot better at what they do. And I also
( ... )
Comments 6
Reply
Stallman actually thinks that information can be divided up into a small number of categories that have different rules apply to them. I rather agree with him and the categories he's chosen. Though, since he tries hard to make sure all of his public statements are focused on the idea of Free Software, it's difficult to find his statements about other kinds of information.
Reply
Reply
There is no reasonable response to your musing.
In my opinion, all of those inventions even taken together have a small fraction of the importance of software. Software is the art of arranging matter so that it interacts with itself and the rest of the world in a manner designed to accomplish a specific purpose. All technology, any invention at all, can be thought of as software. It's all figuring out new and novel ways of programming matter to do things we find useful.
As for my own ego... I feel that I am a better than average programmer. Significantly better. But, I also know that many programmers feel that way, and they can't all be right. In the end, I don't really care how good a programmer I am as long as what I make is useful to others and largely works. And that's pretty much how I feel about other programmers as well.
So, while I take pride in working with a technology that I feel is extremely important, I would be happy working with it even if I didn't feel it was that important.
I find your comment to actually be a ( ... )
Reply
It seeems that we are great and standing around and admiring ou work. Whilst ignoring the fact that 90% of it is delivered late, over-budget or lacking required functionality.
Sure we do some great stuffbut out of all the code written in the last 20 years I can only think of a few examples that have seriously impacted normal peoples lives (and less examples that are free).
Reply
I think that software designed with a grand, overarching plan is doomed to failure. I think the best software starts small, and grows with the needs of the people who use it.
Small software affects people's lives in important ways all the time. I think LJ is a great example. LJ is not small now, but it started that way. The people who make it have had to grow the software, and be very careful about the features they add and how they work lest they destroy the community. I think LJ, and things like it, are having a huge impact on people's ability to create and maintain social networks.
For example, I think because of LJ I will be able to build a network of friends here in Seattle within a couple of years that would've taken me 10 years to build before something like LJ. That's not a small impact. And it's an impact that relies on things like Apache, Linux, perl, and XML that don't seem to have any obvious effect on the lives of the average person.
But, I agree, software people could get a lot better at what they do. And I also ( ... )
Reply
Leave a comment