763 karma · joined July 17, 2009
@moeburney (twitter)
This is not confidence -- this is insecurity and arrogance.
But this is similar to saying what is real is what corresponds to reality. Do you see the circularity here?
The philosophers who engage in questioning the "real" are not doing it for the reasons scientists engage in discovering "correct" phenomena. The longing for a deeper meaning and clarity beyond scientific inquiry is a spiritual longing. These philosophers are trying to describe ways in which human beings fit in the world, how we can deal with the groundlessness of our existence, what choices we have in light of the anguish that comes from our mortality.
The problem is that many people view this as a competition against science or "exact" thinking. It is not.
I think this quote from Leo Strauss sums up my point:
"Men are constantly attracted and deluded by two opposite charms: the charm of competence which is engendered by mathematics and everything akin to mathematics, and the charm of humble awe, which is engendered by meditation on the human soul and its experiences. Philosophy is characterized by the gentle, if firm, refusal to succumb to either charm. It is the highest form of the mating of courage and moderation. In spite of its highness or nobility, it could appear as Sisyphean or ugly, when one contrasts its achievement with its goal. Yet it is necessarily accompanied, sustained and elevated by eros. It is graced by nature's grace."
But what is the purpose of mentioning this?
If you are recommending that he go ahead with the endeavour, then what does it matter if he ends up with a deliverable product or not.
Also, these kind of projects can have a timeframe of years, regardless of programming skill. If he finishes it, it will be a result of him sticking to it in the long run, not a result of how much C knowledge he had on the first day of the project.
EDIT: Totally misunderstood that the OP meant it figuratively. Apologies.
Don't worry about reading SICP or becoming an expert at some technology. That will come automatically over time. Just choose one stack for your side project and go with it.
It doesn't matter if you code your project in C, clojure, or ruby. What matters is that you produce something that you feel good about. If you make a goal to produce something good, you will learn the technologies and you will become a good hacker over time.
I write all this because I was in the same position as you a couple years ago, so I scrapped my ambition of reading theoretical CS books and learning all the latest hot new technologies (I will do all that stuff later). I decided I'd make a game, and learn what I need to add the features that I imagined. And I progressed. It was so much more fun that way.
If you want to try it, it might be better to ease into it, for example try having some fruit instead of no food at all.
To speak plainly, to be patient and put the dots together, to lead without charisma are all incredibly difficult things to do. It really does take genius and only the extraordinary amongst us can do it.
If you have a natural, god-given charisma, its very easy to be a leader. No accomplishment there. But you would lead for what purpose?
If you have some uncanny ability to predict the future as a whole, without error, you would be popular for your predictions but you wouldn't build much of anything, because building great things requires trial and error.
If you were merely a design expert, you'd make nice looking things, but you wouldn't be able to scale it, compared to the non-designer that sees the greatness in other designers.
Being foolish and curious really trumps all other skills, but how many people can truly endure being foolish and curious?
Ever since I learned programming, I've found that the more I write code, the harder it is to get in the flow of other tasks that require a loose, less rigid mind set (sports, dancing, writing, music, business). So now I deliberately do things to balance these mind sets.
Running a business, or working on a creative project can also cause a lot of unhappiness and misery. I've been pursuing my goals and dreams for a couple of years now and I don't think it has made me happier at all.
I've found these things to be much more important:
-Maintaining a calm, relaxed state as much as possible. Not suppressing anger but not letting it destroy you either.
-Physical and mental challenges; doesn't mean you have to quit your job and pursue some grand scheme though
-Socializing
I think this is just merely the blog poster's world view articulated into 29 points, and incidentally he has travelled the world instead of living in one place.
My point is that when you have the startup process manufactured and replicated into a kind of meta-startup (like YC), at a certain point the goals of the founders become more about conforming to the community and impressing each other rather than creating a genuine product.
Obviously not all YC startups are like this, but any time something grows and scales, there is a danger of it losing its original purpose.
Apple, Google, and Microsoft were outsiders when they were startups. Current SV incubator teams are more like elite in-crowd communities, safe and insular.
People who do nothing physically demanding and sit at a desk all day are a lot more at risk. And probably not enjoying a full range of activities either.
Some days I don't even feel like eating at lunch, and prefer to have a late lunch in the afternoon.
And why the compulsion to sit with people that I already interact with the entire day? Nothing wrong with being social with your co-workers, but it ought to be natural. This isn't kindergarten.