 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> - Everybody else on the Internet is an asshole.
>
> There are a lot of assholes out there..
>
>> - I'm an asshole.
>
> You're not ...
If it was just one person who thinks I'm an idiot, I probably wouldn't
care too much. But when several of the experts you look up to all
unanimously agree, it's quite upsetting.
>> I could sit here complaining about how everybody seems to have it in
>> for me. Or I could just face up to the fact that I UPSET PEOPLE, and
>> ask myself why...
>
> You only really bother me when you're so down on yourself. I must have
> missed the database discussion involving Darren, but I don't think
> you're the only person to be flamed by Warp (I think I've had a run-in
> with him at some point in the past) so it's not necessarily you.
>
> A lot of internet groups tend to be a bit cliquish, and I suspect that's
> what is happening at the Haskell group.
[IIRC, the database debate happened on this server's haskell group,
which few people know exists.]
Warp seems to access the Internet only to tell me I've mis-spelt things.
(As if I couldn't have guessed that. My inability to spell is legend.)
To be honest, that doesn't really bother me. Mostly.
OTOH, Warp is clearly a God-like programmer, and when He says something
about programming, he's usually right. (Though not always.) Go ask him
what the most efficient way to implement a Huffman tree in C++ is; I bet
he knows.
It seems like only a few months ago I started learning Haskell, but the
other day I found an assay about it, written by me, dated 2004. I've
been using this thing for *years*! And during all that time, Warp keeps
telling me that it's hopelessly inefficient, and I keep saying it isn't.
It got to the point where I'd see a post from Warp saying that Haskell
sucks because of X, and I'd spent half an hour trying to come up with a
reason why X is false. It ceased to be about the truth, and about
wanting to be right. I *wanted* Haskell to be the best.
But wanting something to be true doesn't make it true. And,
unfortunately for me, Warp is right, as usual. Haskell sucks. And no
amount of words from me is going to change it. My pride and joy actually
sucks, and I can't do anything about it.
Similarly, Darren is obviously an expert when it comes to computer
theory. I have no idea what the hell a recursively enumerable set is,
but I bet Darren does. When somebody like that tells you you're an
idiot, you sit up and take notice.
Yet again, the Haskell mailing lists collectively have more PhDs than
you can shake a stick at. There are people there who know the difference
between an endomorphism and an epimorphism, and people who actually
comprehend the Curry-Howard isomorphism. And, almost unanimously, they
all regard me as some kind of troll. They think I'm there just to cause
disruption.
Nobody else on the forum gets singled out as a troll. (Except for that
one guy who really *is* a troll!) Lots of other people, many of them
beginners like myself, manage to coexist quite happily. So clearly I
personally must be doing something very wrong to attract this kind of
negative attention.
If it was just one person who disliked me, it probably wouldn't bother
me. But when so many otherwise rational, intelligent people all say
you're stupid... eventually it starts to sink in.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>
> OTOH, Warp is clearly a God-like programmer, and when He says something
> about programming, he's usually right. (Though not always.) Go ask him
> what the most efficient way to implement a Huffman tree in C++ is; I bet
> he knows.
>
And thats where my run-ins with Warp usually occur. I say something
misguided about programming and he jumps in. That's just Warp.
> Similarly, Darren is obviously an expert when it comes to computer
> theory. I have no idea what the hell a recursively enumerable set is,
> but I bet Darren does. When somebody like that tells you you're an
> idiot, you sit up and take notice.
Darren? Really?
FWIW, I've seen Darren and Warp really have it out over C# of all
things. But yes, they both know their stuff. That doesn't mean you're
actually an idiot, though.
> Nobody else on the forum gets singled out as a troll. (Except for that
> one guy who really *is* a troll!) Lots of other people, many of them
> beginners like myself, manage to coexist quite happily. So clearly I
> personally must be doing something very wrong to attract this kind of
> negative attention.
What made them think you're a troll?
> If it was just one person who disliked me, it probably wouldn't bother
> me. But when so many otherwise rational, intelligent people all say
> you're stupid... eventually it starts to sink in.
Right. I've been smacked in the head enough on here to know to be every
careful when I post on programming topics. I'm out of my depth with some
of folks on here, and I know that.
To change the subject (sort of):
BTW, I think I'm procrastinating on the filter stuff.. Right now I'm
trying to get properly feeding a circular sound buffer data so I can try
listening in realtime.
You seem to have quite an understanding of mathematics, though, which
says a lot. You know and understand things that would make a layperson
take one look and go curl up in a corner.
--
~Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> Nobody else on the forum gets singled out as a troll. (Except for that
>> one guy who really *is* a troll!) Lots of other people, many of them
>> beginners like myself, manage to coexist quite happily. So clearly I
>> personally must be doing something very wrong to attract this kind of
>> negative attention.
>
> What made them think you're a troll?
This is of course the crucial question.
What is it about me that makes so many different people think that I'm
just an attention-seeking fool with a loud mouth who doesn't know what
he's talking about? Several different people, in unrelated forums, have
all independently come to the same conclusion. There must be a reason
for this.
> You seem to have quite an understanding of mathematics, though, which
> says a lot. You know and understand things that would make a layperson
> take one look and go curl up in a corner.
Yeah. I can do basic algebra correctly - sometimes. It seems that
somehow I extrapolated from this that I'm some kind of maths "expert".
Needless to say, delusions of grandure don't go down too well when you
meet a *real* expert.
Maybe that's what my problem is? Ideas about my station?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible escreveu:
> But wanting something to be true doesn't make it true. And,
> unfortunately for me, Warp is right, as usual. Haskell sucks. And no
> amount of words from me is going to change it. My pride and joy actually
> sucks, and I can't do anything about it.
Haskell doesn't suck. It sucks a lot less than C++, certainly. Being
slower doesn't mean it sucks. The higher-level the language and more
away from the underlying low-level metal, the better. Haskell sucks a
lot less performance-wise than most other very high-level languages.
And I still prefer Scheme, despite being much slower than Haskell... :)
> If it was just one person who disliked me, it probably wouldn't bother
> me. But when so many otherwise rational, intelligent people all say
> you're stupid... eventually it starts to sink in.
Being not as intelligent as truly intelligent people is not the same as
being stupid. Endlessly pestering such bright people over reasonably
basic stuff you still don't understand... well, that's stupid. ;)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> Warp seems to access the Internet only to tell me I've mis-spelt things.
It's "misspelt"! ;)
> OTOH, Warp is clearly a God-like programmer, and when He says something
> about programming, he's usually right. (Though not always.) Go ask him
> what the most efficient way to implement a Huffman tree in C++ is; I bet
> he knows.
I'm not always right. Making yourself look smarter than you really are
is an art.
Of course when someone more knowledgeable about the subject calls your
bluff, it can be really embarrassing. Admitting that you were wrong can
be really difficult.
> But wanting something to be true doesn't make it true. And,
> unfortunately for me, Warp is right, as usual. Haskell sucks. And no
> amount of words from me is going to change it. My pride and joy actually
> sucks, and I can't do anything about it.
Haskell doesn't suck. The only problem I find with it is that it's not
very approachable. It's hard to learn.
It also seems that while Haskell can be used to create very efficient
programs, it often happens that some properties of the language kick you
in the groin when you try to do things in a simple way, resulting in a
very inefficient program. You really need to know the inner workings of
the language, the compiler and the libraries in order to be able to create
the efficient implementation.
(Of course the same is true for C++ and probably all languages. It's just
that Haskell seems to be often advertised as "if it compiles, it works, and
it's efficient", which doesn't seem true to me. You can often write clever
one-liners which achieve things which would need dozens of lines in other
languages, but that doesn't automatically mean the resulting program is
efficient (or even correct).)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> I see two possibilities:
>
> - Everybody else on the Internet is an asshole.
www.youtube.com
- Ricky
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"alphaQuad" <alp### [at] earthlinknet> wrote in message
Lol @ the subject aQ. "C'mon, stick'em up... stick'em up..."
> Have you EVER loved anyone?
This is totally irrelevent.
> Ever cared for anyone?
Irrelevent.
> More importantly has anyone ever cared for you?
And irrelevent.
> ANSWER the question, DONT troll and DON'T derail the question.
> I'd bet money on "NO" to all 3 questions.
I love the emphasis with the caps here. It's like, as a reader, you just
know what won't happen.
I'd give up if I were you aQ and go enjoy some PoVing. :)
~Steve~
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Mon, 16 Feb 2009 17:16:58 +0100, Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
>
> Yet again, the Haskell mailing lists collectively have more PhDs than
> you can shake a stick at. There are people there who know the difference
> between an endomorphism and an epimorphism, and people who actually
> comprehend the Curry-Howard isomorphism. And, almost unanimously, they
> all regard me as some kind of troll. They think I'm there just to cause
> disruption.
Because you *are* causing disruption. You continue to question things the
old-timers have taken for granted for so long. Your kind will lead the way
into the future, stepping over their tired old corpses on the way.
Keep it up.
--
FE
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 2/16/2009 8:16 AM, Invisible wrote:
>>> - Everybody else on the Internet is an asshole.
>>
>> There are a lot of assholes out there..
Seriously, there are!
> Warp seems to access the Internet only to tell me I've mis-spelt things.
lol! That is, honestly, one of the funniest things I've read in a long
time :) Trust me, you're not THAT important to him!
> OTOH, Warp is clearly a God-like programmer, and when He says something
> about programming, he's usually right. (Though not always.) Go ask him
> what the most efficient way to implement a Huffman tree in C++ is; I bet
> he knows.
> It seems like only a few months ago I started learning Haskell, but the
> other day I found an assay about it, written by me, dated 2004. I've
> been using this thing for *years*! And during all that time, Warp keeps
> telling me that it's hopelessly inefficient, and I keep saying it isn't.
If you want efficient, go for C. There's a reason it's still around,
despite C++ being 20 years old.
Haskell isn't C. It's not trying to be, either.
> reason why X is false. It ceased to be about the truth, and about
> wanting to be right. I *wanted* Haskell to be the best.
I've definitely been there; actually, that's how I feel about POV-Ray.
There are honestly programs out there that people accomplish a lot more
in, with less effort, but I don't care - I love POV's way of doing things!
> Yet again, the Haskell mailing lists collectively have more PhDs than
> you can shake a stick at.
Listen to me: the more educated you are, the more likely you are to be
an asshole - ESPECIALLY to people who either don't understand your point
of view, or (even worse) people who don't agree with you.
If you show up on their mailing list, asking questions about why things
are the way they are, you're likely to piss them off just because you
have good questions. You're not a "yes" man, you're not a fawning
sycophant, and that makes your intelligence a threat to their
established positions of power.
Maybe I'm just cynical, but unfortunately my experience backs up
humanity's dark side :(
> If it was just one person who disliked me, it probably wouldn't bother
> me. But when so many otherwise rational, intelligent people all say
> you're stupid... eventually it starts to sink in.
What about when so many otherwise rational, intelligent people all say
you're smart & they like you? Who are going to listen to?
--
...Chambers
www.pacificwebguy.com
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible wrote:
>>> Nobody else on the forum gets singled out as a troll. (Except for
>>> that one guy who really *is* a troll!) Lots of other people, many of
>>> them beginners like myself, manage to coexist quite happily. So
>>> clearly I personally must be doing something very wrong to attract
>>> this kind of negative attention.
>>
>> What made them think you're a troll?
>
> This is of course the crucial question.
>
> What is it about me that makes so many different people think that I'm
> just an attention-seeking fool with a loud mouth who doesn't know what
> he's talking about? Several different people, in unrelated forums, have
> all independently come to the same conclusion. There must be a reason
> for this.
If I had to guess I'd say that it has little to do with your ability and
more to do with the volume of your posts (which I assume is similarly
large on the Haskell forums). Since this group is off-topic it's not
really a problem, and I enjoy that it means there's almost always
something to read when I want to procrastinate. If the Haskell forums
aren't off-topic, however, then it's something of a different story. I
imagine you might get a similar reaction if you were accounting for 50%
of the posts in povray.general (and people didn't know you from p.o-t
already).
Anyway, I don't think you should take it personally, but remember that
most other people can't keep up with your rate of posting, and that this
might cause a problem in a forum where there's an expectation that posts
will be read and carefully responded to. Of course, I don't visit the
Haskell forums so this is all pure speculation on my part, so feel free
to discard it accordingly.
Also, don't confuse Haskell `sucking' with Haskell simply not being
better than other languages in all circumstances. I don't think
anyone's arguing that C++ will always give you a `better' solution than
Haskell for every problem.
Also also, don't get so down about not being the best at some things.
No expert started out that way, and even for the best experts there's
almost always someone better. It's just part of life.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
