Erik Naggum Quotes

Enlightenment is probably antithetical to impatience.

I went to my local bookstore the other day. I wanted to give a beautifully bound Bible to a Christian friend of mine. Suddenly, I felt space around me warp and I was in USENET space. People from comp.lang.scheme offered me a beutifully bound Torah. People from comp.lang.dylan offered me a beautifully bound Koran. People from elsewhere on the Net offered me beautifully bound copies of The Lord of the Rings, Atlas Shrugged, A New Kind of Science, and then other people chimed in with suggestions for Gray's Anatomy, The Chicago Manual of Style, and the 25-year anniversary edition of Gödel, Escher, Bach, all of them arguing that if I wanted the most important book, I would want their suggestions. I scremed, "Enough!", and space just as suddenly warped back to the bookstore and the very helpful young Muslim woman behind the counter went to find a soft-leather-bound Bible with gold edges on the India paper, just like I had wanted and asked for, without unwelcome suggestions or anyone pretending to know better than me. It was so respectful I almost got religion, myself.

If you want to know why Lisp doesn't win around you, find a mirror.

… so as long as you do The Right Thing and forget how you would do it in C, you should be able to get a good grip on this.

XML is a giant step in no direction at all.

Just as other information should be available to those who want to learn and understand, program source code is the only means for programmers to learn the art from their predecessors. It would be unthinkable for playwrights not to allow other playwrights to read their plays, but only be present at theater performances where they would be barred even from taking notes. Likewise, any good author is well read, as every child who learns to write will read hundreds of times more than it writes. Programmers, however, are expected to invent the alphabet and learn to write long novels all on their own. Programming cannot grow and learn unless the next generation of programmers have access to the knowledge and information gathered by other programmers before them.

I may be biased, but I tend to find a much lower tendency among female programmers to be dishonest about their skills, and thus do not say they know C++ when they are smart enough to realize that that would be a lie for all but perhaps 5 people on this planet.

Is it still "artificial intelligence" when the task is to model human stupidity, or would only preventing its devastating consequences get an "AI" rating?

Like so many other things in life, you rarely get only what you optimize for.

A word says more than a thousand images. Exercises for the visually inclined: illustrate "appreciation", "humor", "software", "education", "inalienable rights", "elegance", "fact".

I have actually programmed a fair bit in Perl, like I have C++ code published with my name on it. Other things I have tried and have no intention to do again if I can at all avoid it include smoking, getting drunk enough to puke and waste the whole next day with hang-over, breaking a leg in a violent car crash, getting mugged in New York City, or travel with Aeroflot.

Suppose you want to convert a bunch of pictures into icons. Suppose you know how to do that with one picture: you click on the file, "drag" it over to the icon-generating program, then "drop" it there. Repeat until thoroughly disgusted with the idiocy of the paradigm of direct manipulation. Suppose instead you were able to communicate your actual desire to the computer, in (gasp!) a language!

Act from reason, and failure makes you rethink and study harder. Act from faith, and failure makes you blame someone and push harder.

Travel is a meat thing.

The novice-friendly software is more like a misbehaving dog: it shits on the floor, it destroys things, and stinks – the novice-friendly software embodies the opposite of what computer people have dreamed of for decades: artificial stupidity. It's more human.