PolarLava::Blog

I came across Avoiding Walled Gardens on the Internet yesterday and his comments struck a chord with me.  Not so much for his reasons —although I do agree somewhat with them, but more so that "I don't get it."  I've been getting lots of invites on LinkedIn and I typically accept them if I know you.  But that's all I've ever done on on LinkedIn.  I really don't see a need for it.  Heck, I'm not even sure how I got an account there!  I'm guessing somebody sent me an invite, so I signed up.  Maybe someday I may need a job and it will prove useful.  But for the most part I don't see it really being of any real use to me.  If I need to network for a job there's plenty of people who I speak to regularly that would help me out.  Plus anyone of the countless headhunters that call or email me regularly surely would be happy to help me in my quest…which I'm certainly not up for at this time because I like my job.  Am I missing something here?  I'm quite happy being LinkedOut.

I was reading something earlier today about software development and it linked to this article on The Next Big Thing in software development.  This is a couple of years old, but it's still very relevant today.  Having worked for both big and small software organizations, I can tell you that regardless of size, all of them are capable of churning out some pretty shitty work.  As this article points out, "What other industry ships the kind of crap to their customers that we so regularly do?".  Welcome to the truth ladies and gentlemen.

I know this firsthand from my projects.  There are times when I wonder if I'm nothing more than a one-man open source wrecking machine!  ;)  But I've seen the silly mistakes I've made happen to much larger groups than my group of one.  Groups that have dozens of developers , QA people and even user (customer) acceptance testing!  It's pretty astounding that regardless, sloppy things slip through.

The only real answer —as the article states, it simply that people need to write better software.  It's not about putting in hours, but about taking care in what you do.  It's about accepting criticism without being offended and using that feedback loop to make a better product.

It's what I try do with my projects in hopes that I won't make the same mistakes.  It's a mindset that I try to instill in the people I work with so we get better at what we do.  So take care and have pride in what you're doing.  Don't churn out stuff that you wouldn't personally want your name on.  But when you do produce a dud, take the heat and learn from it.  Be professional, be a software craftsman.

OK, this is somewhat of an ecological disaster, but the fact that The Duck Armada still exists after 15 years is pretty remarkable.  And I'm glad to hear that somebody has bothered to keep track of them and glean useful scientific information from them.

I came across this yesterday and have to agree, Does Anyone Actually Read Software EULAs?  I know I don't and I'm guessing you don't either.  Personally I find them rather pointless as regardless of what you put in there, I'm going to do what I'm going to do.  If your EULA says I can criticize your product publically and your product sucks, guess what?  I don't care about your EULA and I'm going to tell anyone that listens that your product sucks and why I think so.  You'll just have to get over it or sue me, OK?

Companies feel compelled to fill these things with lots of silly bullshit.  I know, you're just protecting your interests.  So why can't we simplify this?  You make your EULA's say we can't give copies of your proprietary product away to others and build the best product you can.  We the slugs that use it will agree not to pirate your wares and provide feedback to you on what's right and wrong with it.  In turn you'll use this information to make your product better and we'll praise it to other instead of making fun of it.  After all, if I paid for it, I think it's with my right to talk about it and do what I want with it -except give it to others.  Sound fair?