Hacker News Reader

Comment by joslin01 | Hacker News Reader

The analogy between a guitar-player and a software engineer is a pretty poor one. You wouldn't go up and say "Hey guitar player, you should do it like this and that" because there's no absolute "correct" way of playing guitar. It's an art-form.

Engineering on the other hand has problems to solve, and so each solution (in code) gets judged on how well it solves the problem. I don't like the idea of saying "Hey nice try! Let's just go ahead and use it!" if the code actually sucks. That's the real world -- things can suck.

Look, end of the day, it's not about other people's opinions. When other people are cheering you on, it influences you to feel good about yourself, but you can do that yourself. If you're not OK with that, maybe you should be a guitar player. As for me, I'm pretty happy with the luxuries being a programmer affords me.

View on HN

Wrong on both counts. Guitarists are douchebags who frequently grab guitars out of the hands of other people and proceed to show them how it should be done while they blast out blazing idiotic riffs. People who don't play guitar also frequently have an opinion on how you play, how to play it "right".

When it comes to software development there is a huge amount of opinion based decision making on what's good vs. bad code despite whether it actually solves a problem or not. Frequently programmers will pick languages and solutions or write code that is awful but then promote it like it's the best thing ever. Even supposedly "perfect" systems for software development end up being horribly unusable and based on basically the equivalent of mathematical fantasy and marketing.

So no, you are pretty wrong on both assertions, and I found that the article had a significant insight I hadn't considered before.

Very true. But also there is another aspect to it - there is a lot of admiration for programmers and engineers and what generally hackers can do, be it Steve Wozniak, Bill Gates, Ted Hoff, Kevin Mytnick, Elon Musk, Kim Dotnet or Edward Snowden - each one of them is a pop superstar in his own respect, no less than Madonna or Britney. Most people see only the final effect of years of dedicated effort, and cannot appreciate Sting's solfeggios that underline his performences. But people do see and appreciate the big bucks of Zuckerberg and Jobs, their impact on culture and social interaction.

On the other hand people don't see the simple coder behing an app just as much as people don't recognise the tuck driver who delivers the groceries.

Writing is an art form. You did to this guy's writing exactly what he said you'd do. And here I am, doing the same to you. And of course it's best to be happy without other peoples' approval, but it's harder, so it's less frequently accomplished. Hence the link with depression.

I don't entirely disagree with you. If software doesn't solve the problem it's supposed to solve, if it's unstable or has some other issues, then it needs work. Or, sometimes, needs to be thrown out and started over. I don't need a pat on the head for that kind of work, and I don't think many people beyond the most junior of programmers does, either.

The main gist though is that software development is work which gets very little recognition outside of its own small social circles, and within those social circles, the recognition is as likely to be negative as positive.

And that sort of environment can feed depression.

There is never one way to solve an engineering problem. Different people will use their own ideas, experiences and understanding to apply unique and creative solutions. Just like a musician.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com