Hulver's site || Spaceship full of corpses?

Spaceship full of corpses?

Romantic	5 votes - 71 %
Unromantic	0 votes - 0 %
-	1 vote - 14 %
Luck is most important factor in "genius"	3 votes - 42 %
Hard work is most important factor in "genius"	2 votes - 28 %
Innate talent is most important factor in "genius"	3 votes - 42 %
Each of these factors is of exactly equally importance	2 votes - 28 %

7 Total Votes

Interstellar Overdrive | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback

On writing showed the world just why by Clipper Ship (1.00 / 1) #1 Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 09:09:00 AM EST

Stephen King will never be remembered for his writing. That was the main point of the book, I think. well, at least the half I suffered through before hospitalization forced me to put it down and never again pick it for fear of the same happening again.

---------------

Destroy All Planets

unrelated things by ucblockhead

(4.00 / 1) #2 Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 10:24:32 AM EST

Famous, successful writer fails to give any silver bullets to good writing. Meanwhile, scientists show that those at the top tier got there solely through hard work.

I remember reading cog sci studies in the eighties that claimed that to become "expert" in a moderately complex field took on the order of 10,000 hours of practice.

I'm glad to see my biases concerning Agile confirmed. Where I work, we do things on a two month cycle. Given how much trouble we sometimes have with long-term architecture, I can't imagine a two-week cycle working in the long term.

I know that the article talks about how people are "doing Agile wrong". But that, to me, just says "Agile is too difficult to do correctly."
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

You have to be fit to be agile by Herring

(4.00 / 1) #3 Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 11:10:40 AM EST

LCC is trying to do some of this (as EssUP). Can you get user involvement? Can you bollocks. Can you get senior management to accept re-planning? Can you bollocks.

Agile type stuff can only work (if at all) if the entire organisation buys in. For us, well we've spent a load of money on consultants and had a lot of daily stand-up meetings, but the software is still shit.

[ Parent ]

Last place I was at was semi-Agile, but by wiredog

(4.00 / 1) #5 Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 04:01:56 AM EST

we didn't call it that. The fact that, at 42, I was the second youngest developer on staff was why we didn't call it that. Hell, I didn't realize it was Agile until I read up on Agile.

We released a build with bugfixes on old features, and new features to test, every two weeks or so. Every Monday was the teleconference with the end users. We got quite a bit accomplished in a relatively short time, and no surprises.

But we didn't bother applying any trendy names or matrices/measures to it. We just did it. Maximal output, minimal bureaucracy, fast turnaround.

And the really funny thing about it: Most of the people on the job were government workers. For Department of Commerce. Go figure.

Earth First!
_{(We can strip mine the rest later.)}
[ Parent ]

: I love that when it happens:) by Merekat (4.00 / 1) #6 Sun Nov 16, 2008 at 10:45:03 PM EST

When I did PRINCE2 training (fashionable PM methodology), the instructor kept going on about how it was very important not to apply PRINCE2 In Name Only but to do it properly. All the while I was thinking it is much better not to call what you apply a name at all and just pilfer from the methodology the bits that work.

[ Parent ]

Practise makes perfect by Herring

(4.00 / 1) #4 Sat Nov 15, 2008 at 11:14:26 AM EST

The element missing in there is: why do people practise? Maybe average musicians don't practise so much because they don't enjoy it so much and aren't getting as much out of playing. Maybe for the genii, there is a positive feedback loop and for the rest of us, there's a negative feedback (until we reach our 30s and just play for fun without giving a damn how it sounds).

(Comment Deleted) by bobdole (2.00 / 0) #8 Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 05:26:47 AM EST

This comment has been deleted by bobdole

[ Parent ]

: downhill from here by bobdole (4.00 / 1) #9 Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 05:28:42 AM EST

playing an instrument doesn't really get fun until you learn to do it properly. I believe it's a positive feedback loop for everybody, but it has increasing returns the longer you do it (I guess up until the point where you are the expert and settle for maintaining rather than improving your skills).

So the people that give up resign before they reach the top of the hill and the stuff actually becomes fun... of course there are some who are just hopeless, but for the rest... practise!

-- The revolution will not be televised.
[ Parent ]

I quite liked On Writing by nebbish (4.00 / 1) #7 Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 12:19:19 AM EST

It's years since I read it though.

I think Stephen King's writing suffered terribly when he stopped drinking, but slowly got better and better afterwards. I think the same thing happened with Will Self too.

King's advice is good but it's interesting how every writer gives conflicting advice. You need to find a way that suits you.

--------
It's political correctness gone mad!

Practicing and music by Tonatiuh (2.00 / 0) #10 Mon Nov 17, 2008 at 10:54:23 AM EST

They choose the worst example to understand genius. By the age of 8 it is pretty clear to everybody involved, future musicians included, who is a genius, who is going to be a teacher, and those who will lay somewhere in between. The innate aptitude is patently obvious and for all to see.

I have had the privilege to see some musical geniuses when they were 8, they were ready to go and everybody knew it.

From that point the geniuses tend to invest more time in their confirmed talent, the stakes are higher for them and stacked on their favour. For the people without the innate talent it is a lost battle, and they apply themselves accordingly (i.e. not much, it would be pointless).

Interstellar Overdrive | 10 comments (10 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback


Make a new account
Username:
Password: