Prev: translating
Next: Survey about 'The view of the IT staff on open source software'
From: Andrew Poelstra on 16 Mar 2010 17:50
On 2010-03-14, Chad <cdalten(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Am I right to assume that the reason why most people take up
> programming is because they like programming? I'm just curious because
> the reason I took up programming was because it seemed like a safe
> outlet to escape my ongoing battles with alcoholism and depression.
> Over time, I learned to express my hate and anger through computer
> code.
>
> To this day, I still code with hate. I'm just sort of curious if this
> is normal or healthy.

I've been programming since I was a young child (I learnt to
spell as part of learning BASIC) (which probably contributed
more than a bit to my dislike for the English language). And
like any art, it's possible to use code as a very expressive
medium.

Generally I'm not an angry person. Maybe that's just part of
having fought computers all my life, but in any case I'm not
a great judge of expressing anger through code.

But coding is certainly an outlet for depression or pain and
sometimes it's a good substitute for alcohol. Conversely, it
is an art in its own right. (In fact, I have solved problems
to do with code on the piano, and vice versa.)

So I think it is normal to be expressive through code. Using
it exclusively as an outlet for anger might not be, but it's
certainly not unhealthy, I don't think.

That's my thoughts.

--
Andrew Poelstra
http://www.wpsoftware.net/andrew
From: Pascal J. Bourguignon on 21 Mar 2010 11:29
"BGB / cr88192" <cr88192(a)hotmail.com> writes:
> eventually, the poor software availability and hardware compatibility on
> Linux caused me to migrate back to Windows (although, at this point I ended
> up using Windows 2000).

You're confessing that you heavily illegally copied MS-Windows
software?

Because you cannot beat software availability of linux, since it's
mostly free and open software.

To get half the software you have and had on linux on MacOS or
MS-Windows, you would have first to be as rich as Bill Gates, or not
far, and then poor as Job, or close.



> around 2001-2003, I ended up messing a fair amount with Scheme, and did my
> own implementation/variant, and ended up writing a decently complex app
> based around this. by around 2003 though, it collapsed under its own weight,
> and I returned primarily to C land.

Software doesn't weight anything. What you're confessing, is that you
grew that piece of software beyond your capacity of comprehension. No
shame, it occurs to everybody. The trick is to learn to build complex
software in such a way that it doesn't grow beyond comprehension.



> I have never really gotten any money from any of this...
> my life just seems to be escaping, months and years at a time, and I am not
> sure if any of this will go anywhere.

As I see it, you have basically three positive exits:

- get a job, ie. put your capability to good use to the service of
others' need.

- get a life, ie. get a wife, make babies, be happy.

- get a goal, ie. something big that would revolutionize the computer
field, such as AI, or a new kind of OS/user interface, which could
provide you a lifetime of the sort of programming you've liked so
far. (This could include getting into academia).


If you're extra successful, you could even get the three :-)



> for example, I could utilize lots of Windows-specific stuff, but what if I
> want to use my code on Linux?...

WINE.


> or, I could use lots of Linux-specific stuff, but then what about
> Windows?...

Cygwin.


> it leads to a coding style where a whole lot of stuff I end up writing
> myself.

Use the internet more! (eg. sourceforge.net and similar, and project
specific newsgroups, maillists and irc channels, to communicate with
fellow programmers).


--
__Pascal Bourguignon__
From: Matt on 21 Mar 2010 14:40
On Sun, 21 Mar 2010 16:29:26 +0100, Pascal J. Bourguignon wrote:

>"BGB / cr88192" <cr88192(a)hotmail.com> writes:
>
>> I have never really gotten any money from any of this...
>> my life just seems to be escaping, months and years at a time, and I am not
>> sure if any of this will go anywhere.
>
>As I see it, you have basically three positive exits:
>
>- get a job, ie. put your capability to good use to the service of
> others' need.
>
>- get a life, ie. get a wife, make babies, be happy.
>
>- get a goal, ie. something big that would revolutionize the computer
> field, such as AI, or a new kind of OS/user interface, which could
> provide you a lifetime of the sort of programming you've liked so
> far. (This could include getting into academia).
>
>
>If you're extra successful, you could even get the three :-)

Perhaps the third of these "positive exits" often leads to the problem
stated.

Those with the goal of bringing fusion power to the world in the next
decade have been frustrated for the past half-century. If they have
been trying to do it on their own dime, they probably have little to
show for it monetarily.

An "I'm going to change the world" delusion has used up many people
for naught.

http://www.andyandrews.com/store/books/product/mastering-the-seven-decisions/
everything you do matters to all of us - forever.

We don't have to hang our hat on one thing to point to so everyone
will know we are important. It comes with being born. If we weren't
needed in the world, we wouldn't be here.

The thing that you do that is most important to me might be something
which you thought was insignificant.

God Himself can see our simplest deeds as being important:
Matt 25:40 - 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one
of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.'

First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: translating
Next: Survey about 'The view of the IT staff on open source software'