And Yes, They're Really, Really Bad...
The Setup: Ziff-Davis web software development columnist Peter Coffee wrote a column comparing "sports" to good website development. Naturally, I took umbrage. It is my personal belief that "sports" are for those on the lower slope of the intelligence curve, those who believe some minor accidental ability in some contrived ritualistic combat might actually equate to ability in real-life situations. Now mind you, there are certain "adult games" that might actually prove useful at some point (hunting, fishing, driving, martial arts, and, ah, "bedroom sports"), and I respect those who take the time to maximize their skills in these useful areas, but the idea that perfecting one's skills in, say, baseball might prove useful some day is ridiculous on its face. Here's a note I sent to Coffee in response. For some odd reason, he didn't reply. You don't suppose I touched a nerve, do you?
Mr. Coffee:
Sports? Oh, please! Aren't you a bit too intelligent to have bought into that nonsense? Sports cannot be used as a metaphor for anything save stupidity, idiocy, and rampant moronic imbecility. Having been a kids' soccer coach, I speak from experience when I say the so-called "parents" of children too stupid to think their way out of a paper sack have ruined that sport just as horribly as they have football or baseball.
First off, let's get one thing straight: in genetics, the term "sport" refers to a freak of nature, a horribly foul genetic mutation which never should have occurred, and is dangerously injurious to its recipient. There is little doubt in my mind that this is a precise and valid description of those who believe some form of athletic competition makes one a better person.
These vile and loathesome half-wits and their despicable progeny are fated to continue their downward spiral as burger-flippers, janitors, and salescritters, and they should frankly be banned from any interaction with anybody, anywhere, with an I.Q. any higher than, say, 100 points. The only reason they should not be sterilized and their miscreant offspring ground up as cattle feed is that our society requires somebody to empty the garbage and stock shelves in the dark of night so that decent people can go to work and create the automated systems that make life simple enough for these microcephalics' feeble minds to comprehend it.
If you wish to say that the process of web development is poorly controlled, makes no sense, and is widely practiced by people who should be locked away somewhere lest they injure themselves or others, wouldn't it be simpler to just say so, instead of belaboring this wretched metaphor about the head and shoulders in an attempt to stretch it beyond the limits of credibility and good taste?
Now mind you, I did enjoy the comparison of "foo'bawl" to IBM batch processing (quite apt), but it's quite a stretch to compare any stick-and-ball children's game (if it doesn't require gunpowder or gasoline, it's a children's game, no matter how much they're paid as entertainers) to any form of data processing. Data processing follows clearly defined rules precisely. There are no gray areas; it's either a one or a zero. Sports are for those who cannot comprehend absolutes. In data processing, there is no room for human error, while sport caters to it by having referees who will explain the rules (very slowly, using small words) to those too stupid to read the fornicating manual before taking the field. Of course, I've seen situations in which the refs hadn't read the fine manual either, but that's another rant for another day.
I've also seen instances where kids brought up on sports attempted to do something requiring actual thought. We have a name for that occurrence: the dot-com bubble-burst. These kids, who were raised to believe it's all right to foul the other players if the ref isn't looking, tried that kind of bubble-headed nonsense in developing web-based systems. Is it any wonder they failed miserably? In a world where supposedly-grown adults playing a children's game are regarded more highly than astronauts (who risk their lives in the pursuit of knowledge for the benefit of all, rather than in selfish displays of self-aggrandizement and greed), is it any wonder that our engineering and technology are going straight to hell in a handbasket?
We must first ban all sports more competitive than, say, tetherball, or else create new sports in which cooperation toward a common goal is rewarded (when one team "beats" another, we all lose). Next, we need to re-establish math and science as the basic foundations of our society (test the kids in first grade, and if they can't handle things at that point, either get them some remedial help, or teach them how to mop floors, because they won't be good for much else). Lastly, we need to make clear that creating something of lasting quality should be everybody's goal (whether trucks or transistors, it should be the best that can be made with current art and available technology).
I've no doubt, Peter, that just like me, there is code you wrote 20 years ago that's still in service today, doing something useful. Today's kids can't write spare, elegant code to save their lives, much less desk-check it to assure it compiles and runs correctly. This "iterate until it doesn't break any more" mentality can be traced directly back to sports. And what's up with this "team" nonsense? Has anything of value ever been created by a team? There's an old joke that an elephant is a mouse designed by a team. Individual effort is what sets the marvelous apart from the mediocre. Only when everybody is committed to personal excellence does the team's output rise above the pedestrian. Sport teaches the wrong lessons, and should be relegated to the mindless obscurity it deserves, rather than having people devote their entire lives to it. Let's put the focus back on intelligence and rationality, where it belongs.
-- Duke Walls
Yorba Linda, CA
The Setup: Ziff-Davis web software development columnist Peter Coffee wrote a column comparing "sports" to good website development. Naturally, I took umbrage. It is my personal belief that "sports" are for those on the lower slope of the intelligence curve, those who believe some minor accidental ability in some contrived ritualistic combat might actually equate to ability in real-life situations. Now mind you, there are certain "adult games" that might actually prove useful at some point (hunting, fishing, driving, martial arts, and, ah, "bedroom sports"), and I respect those who take the time to maximize their skills in these useful areas, but the idea that perfecting one's skills in, say, baseball might prove useful some day is ridiculous on its face. Here's a note I sent to Coffee in response. For some odd reason, he didn't reply. You don't suppose I touched a nerve, do you?
Mr. Coffee:
Sports? Oh, please! Aren't you a bit too intelligent to have bought into that nonsense? Sports cannot be used as a metaphor for anything save stupidity, idiocy, and rampant moronic imbecility. Having been a kids' soccer coach, I speak from experience when I say the so-called "parents" of children too stupid to think their way out of a paper sack have ruined that sport just as horribly as they have football or baseball.
First off, let's get one thing straight: in genetics, the term "sport" refers to a freak of nature, a horribly foul genetic mutation which never should have occurred, and is dangerously injurious to its recipient. There is little doubt in my mind that this is a precise and valid description of those who believe some form of athletic competition makes one a better person.
These vile and loathesome half-wits and their despicable progeny are fated to continue their downward spiral as burger-flippers, janitors, and salescritters, and they should frankly be banned from any interaction with anybody, anywhere, with an I.Q. any higher than, say, 100 points. The only reason they should not be sterilized and their miscreant offspring ground up as cattle feed is that our society requires somebody to empty the garbage and stock shelves in the dark of night so that decent people can go to work and create the automated systems that make life simple enough for these microcephalics' feeble minds to comprehend it.
If you wish to say that the process of web development is poorly controlled, makes no sense, and is widely practiced by people who should be locked away somewhere lest they injure themselves or others, wouldn't it be simpler to just say so, instead of belaboring this wretched metaphor about the head and shoulders in an attempt to stretch it beyond the limits of credibility and good taste?
Now mind you, I did enjoy the comparison of "foo'bawl" to IBM batch processing (quite apt), but it's quite a stretch to compare any stick-and-ball children's game (if it doesn't require gunpowder or gasoline, it's a children's game, no matter how much they're paid as entertainers) to any form of data processing. Data processing follows clearly defined rules precisely. There are no gray areas; it's either a one or a zero. Sports are for those who cannot comprehend absolutes. In data processing, there is no room for human error, while sport caters to it by having referees who will explain the rules (very slowly, using small words) to those too stupid to read the fornicating manual before taking the field. Of course, I've seen situations in which the refs hadn't read the fine manual either, but that's another rant for another day.
I've also seen instances where kids brought up on sports attempted to do something requiring actual thought. We have a name for that occurrence: the dot-com bubble-burst. These kids, who were raised to believe it's all right to foul the other players if the ref isn't looking, tried that kind of bubble-headed nonsense in developing web-based systems. Is it any wonder they failed miserably? In a world where supposedly-grown adults playing a children's game are regarded more highly than astronauts (who risk their lives in the pursuit of knowledge for the benefit of all, rather than in selfish displays of self-aggrandizement and greed), is it any wonder that our engineering and technology are going straight to hell in a handbasket?
We must first ban all sports more competitive than, say, tetherball, or else create new sports in which cooperation toward a common goal is rewarded (when one team "beats" another, we all lose). Next, we need to re-establish math and science as the basic foundations of our society (test the kids in first grade, and if they can't handle things at that point, either get them some remedial help, or teach them how to mop floors, because they won't be good for much else). Lastly, we need to make clear that creating something of lasting quality should be everybody's goal (whether trucks or transistors, it should be the best that can be made with current art and available technology).
I've no doubt, Peter, that just like me, there is code you wrote 20 years ago that's still in service today, doing something useful. Today's kids can't write spare, elegant code to save their lives, much less desk-check it to assure it compiles and runs correctly. This "iterate until it doesn't break any more" mentality can be traced directly back to sports. And what's up with this "team" nonsense? Has anything of value ever been created by a team? There's an old joke that an elephant is a mouse designed by a team. Individual effort is what sets the marvelous apart from the mediocre. Only when everybody is committed to personal excellence does the team's output rise above the pedestrian. Sport teaches the wrong lessons, and should be relegated to the mindless obscurity it deserves, rather than having people devote their entire lives to it. Let's put the focus back on intelligence and rationality, where it belongs.
-- Duke Walls
Yorba Linda, CA