7 ms·

It's a really great read and did a lot to inform my approach to writing all kinds of software. It's a shame that I cringe to recommend in now due to the politic

It's a really great read and did a lot to inform my approach to writing all kinds of software. It's a shame that I cringe to recommend in now due to the politics of its author.

yarou 11y ago
That's really bizarre. A person's political views have no bearing on the validity or usefulness of what they write.
- Frondo 11y ago
  They absolutely do, but I get your point that that's not necessarily so in every single case. ESR's page on the rationalwiki gets it right, though, when they call him a "stopped clock"--right every once in a while (and by coincidence): http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
  - tjr 11y ago
    How then do you evaluate the validity of writings by an author whose political views you do not know?
    - Frondo 11y ago
      I don't, but I also don't feel the need to. If, however, some other tech blogger I liked started writing about "kill the gays," well, I don't need to overlook that just because I like their tech writing. Like I said elsewhere, none of these folks has a monopoly on good engineering writing/technical thinking. I can read, and ultimately promote, writers whose writing I wouldn't be ashamed to share with all of my friends.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
- davidgerard 11y ago
  That's a bizarre statement in itself. Of course it does.
- peteretep 11y ago
  Undoubtably a deep philosophical argument, but brighter minds than ours have written at length about it both in science and jurisprudence. "Research ethics" and "Exclusionary rule" would be good illustrating Wikipedia articles.
  - arethuza 11y ago
    Out of interest, what are these political views that are so terrible that they should influence our views of his thoughts on operating system design? Edit: I really don't have any idea what they are...
    - philh 11y ago
      Among other unpopular opinions, ESR denies AGW, believes that race and IQ are correlated, and was strongly in favor of the Iraq war.
      - harkyns_castle 11y ago
        That's a surprise to me, I hadn't heard any of that. Not that I've followed things that closely. What I found so far is [1], in which he seems to just be doing a bit of a "show me the data" thing wrt global warming (its fairly old I guess in defense). In [2] he's definitely saying IQ is race-related, and gender related to a lesser extent, in my quick readings. I quite like that he doesn't mince his words, sugar coat things or seem to take any notice of popular opinion/political correctness. Not agreeing with him, but I find that refreshing. [1] http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1436 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1436 [2] http://esr.ibiblio.org/?m=200311 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?m=200311
        laichzeit0 11y ago
        Regarding [2]. So I guess this quote is the problem: > And the part that, if you are a decent human being and not a racist bigot, you have been dreading: American blacks average a standard deviation lower in IQ than American whites at about 85. [...] And yes, it’s genetic; g seems to be about 85% heritable, and recent studies of effects like regression towards the mean suggest strongly that most of the heritability is DNA rather than nurturance effects. So is the problem with him saying this that (a) this is factually false or (b) that it's an inconvenient fact that should be glossed over? He seems to be saying that it's factually true since he obviously read it in some or other study. If it is factually true it's disingenuous to label him as a racist.
- philh 11y ago
  If someone writes something, it's "true" or "false" regardless of their political opinions. On the other hand, someone's political opinions change what they're likely to write, so if you don't know whether it's "true" or not, knowing their political opinions can justifiably alter your beliefs about the text. I think people tend to overweight the second consideration, and it seems particularly irrelevant in this case. (Scare quotes because it's rarely as simple as true-or-false, e.g. "literally true but horribly misleading".)
- arethuza 11y ago
  I don't think jumblesale is arguing that his writings are incorrect or not useful, just that he doesn't like popularizing his works because of the authors political views.
  - fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
    It's still a shame. I certainly don't feel like I have to love everything a person does in order to learn something from them, or even respect some of their work. Likewise, I don't require everyone to agree with my personal opinions in order to pass my courses. Things would really become cumbersome were I to ever change my mind about something.
    - camperman 11y ago
      I agree. Seriously, who gives a toss about what anyone's opinions are on subjects unrelated to what you're reading by them? And even if they do creep in, what's to say you're right or they're wrong? I thought this was part of being an adult but I see it all too often: "so-and-so wrote an excellent technical manual on X but he's right wing so I won't buy it!" I don't understand that way of thinking since no human being will ever 100% agree with any other on everything.
- coldtea 11y ago
  Except if he writes anything about politics, economics, society, etc -- in which case his political views have quite a bearing on the validity or usefulness of what they write.
  - yummyfajitas 11y ago
    Can't you evaluate his claims on their own merits? Unless he's saying "trust me, I won't expose my reasoning but it's solid", or unless you are outsourcing your thinking, such things would seem to be irrelevant.
    - coldtea 11y ago
      >Can't you evaluate his claims on their own merits? As with most things, it takes too much time to do that in detail for every argument one hears. Thankfully with the magic of brain's pattern matching and previous experience to BS arguments we don't have to. We can eliminate tons of opinions from the list of "potentially interesting to investigate" by their mere showing of certain characteristics we already know lead to bogus thinking. ("Hey man, I made a perpetual motion machine. Wait, where are you going? Don't you wanna hear how I made it? You're so close minded" -- or "I don't believe in climate change, it's all bogus. Here's what I think about educational reform..."). Sure, we might get a few false negatives (some good suggestions lost because their originator is a bigot etc), but the system overall works wonders for reducing the signal to noise ratio.
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
      - yummyfajitas 11y ago
        You are conflating a property of the claim itself (violating the laws of physics) with a straw-man property of the person making the claim. They aren't the same thing - one enables a simple proof by contradiction, the other is ad-hominem. Further, your "climate change, it's all bogus" ad hominem isn't even a real claim that skeptics make, and is more more indicative of your thinking than of reality. I get the impression you are just looking for ways to dismiss arguments which make you emotionally uncomfortable. Consider religion instead, it's a lot more unapologetic about simply declaring who the heretics are.
- navait 11y ago
  When they constantly mix technology and politics, yes it does matter. Open Source is a political movement, and that requires taking ESR's version of it with a grain of salt.
  - angersock 11y ago
    Who did a lot of the popularization of that term again? Who cofounded the Open Source Initiative? It's in no small part due to the politicking and goodthink of ESR that we have Open Source as it is today.
  - the_why_of_y 11y ago
    Open Source is not a political movement; you're thinking of Free Software.
- tjr 11y ago
  Further, I suspect the main reason there's any concern at all about recommending ESR's writings due to his politics is because he bothers to write a lot about his political views in the first place, presenting something to potentially disagree with. Many programmers / writers / programmer-writers may well have equally strong political views in one direction or another, with which others may strongly agree or disagree, but they just don't say much about them in public.
- angersock 11y ago
  Unfortunately, the general zeitgeist of the times seems to be that a person's politics are somehow a litmus test for whether or not they should be listened to at all, about anything. Normally this would just be a quirk, but the fact is that a lot of technical people here on HN and other places would happily throw the baby out with the bath water just because they disagree with somebody's politics. It's stupid and unprofessional. With so many companies focusing on such technically boring problems, image management is perhaps legitimately more of a business concern than having the best tech available. So, unfortunately, we have people with dissenting opinions but excellent work slandered or ostracized...even if their opinions are actually worth considering. Then again, that just means that those of us who are more genuinely tolerant will have an edge during hiring. :) Also, on ESR in particular: You have to understand that, rightly or wrongly, his worldview is long-term Culture War. Literally anything which prevents The Right People from breeding faster (homosexuality) or defending themselves (attacks on the 2nd amendment) or arguing (kafkatraps) is suspect. Because he's playing for keeps, he'll do whatever it takes (including, perhaps, being less than perfectly equal in presentations on things) to further his agenda. That's just how it is, and it doesn't reflect on his technical contriubtions or aptitude at all. Hell, the bitch of it is, he's even arguably correct on some of his cultural points, if he himself (much less his detractors) didn't spend so much time sounding so disagreeable and grumpy and wingnutty. Anyways, it's just a sign of the times, as I said. It seems that most people are unable to handle a mental model which accounts for biased or unreliable narrators while still allowing the work of those narrators to be taken advantage of.
spiralpolitik 11y ago
Personally I found it disappointing as it seemed to take the view that the only UNIX in existence since 1992 has been Linux. A better title would have been the Art of Linux Programming or the Art of Open Source Programming.

It's a really great read and did a lot to inform my approach to writing all kinds of software. It's a shame that I cringe to recommend in now due to the politics of its author.

yarou 11y ago

That's really bizarre. A person's political views have no bearing on the validity or usefulness of what they write.

Frondo 11y ago
They absolutely do, but I get your point that that's not necessarily so in every single case. ESR's page on the rationalwiki gets it right, though, when they call him a "stopped clock"--right every once in a while (and by coincidence): http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Eric_S._Raymond
- tjr 11y ago
  How then do you evaluate the validity of writings by an author whose political views you do not know?
  - Frondo 11y ago
    I don't, but I also don't feel the need to. If, however, some other tech blogger I liked started writing about "kill the gays," well, I don't need to overlook that just because I like their tech writing. Like I said elsewhere, none of these folks has a monopoly on good engineering writing/technical thinking. I can read, and ultimately promote, writers whose writing I wouldn't be ashamed to share with all of my friends.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
davidgerard 11y ago
That's a bizarre statement in itself. Of course it does.
peteretep 11y ago
Undoubtably a deep philosophical argument, but brighter minds than ours have written at length about it both in science and jurisprudence. "Research ethics" and "Exclusionary rule" would be good illustrating Wikipedia articles.
- arethuza 11y ago
  Out of interest, what are these political views that are so terrible that they should influence our views of his thoughts on operating system design? Edit: I really don't have any idea what they are...
  - philh 11y ago
    Among other unpopular opinions, ESR denies AGW, believes that race and IQ are correlated, and was strongly in favor of the Iraq war.
    - harkyns_castle 11y ago
      That's a surprise to me, I hadn't heard any of that. Not that I've followed things that closely. What I found so far is [1], in which he seems to just be doing a bit of a "show me the data" thing wrt global warming (its fairly old I guess in defense). In [2] he's definitely saying IQ is race-related, and gender related to a lesser extent, in my quick readings. I quite like that he doesn't mince his words, sugar coat things or seem to take any notice of popular opinion/political correctness. Not agreeing with him, but I find that refreshing. [1] http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1436 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=1436 [2] http://esr.ibiblio.org/?m=200311 http://esr.ibiblio.org/?m=200311
      - laichzeit0 11y ago
        Regarding [2]. So I guess this quote is the problem: > And the part that, if you are a decent human being and not a racist bigot, you have been dreading: American blacks average a standard deviation lower in IQ than American whites at about 85. [...] And yes, it’s genetic; g seems to be about 85% heritable, and recent studies of effects like regression towards the mean suggest strongly that most of the heritability is DNA rather than nurturance effects. So is the problem with him saying this that (a) this is factually false or (b) that it's an inconvenient fact that should be glossed over? He seems to be saying that it's factually true since he obviously read it in some or other study. If it is factually true it's disingenuous to label him as a racist.
philh 11y ago
If someone writes something, it's "true" or "false" regardless of their political opinions. On the other hand, someone's political opinions change what they're likely to write, so if you don't know whether it's "true" or not, knowing their political opinions can justifiably alter your beliefs about the text. I think people tend to overweight the second consideration, and it seems particularly irrelevant in this case. (Scare quotes because it's rarely as simple as true-or-false, e.g. "literally true but horribly misleading".)
arethuza 11y ago
I don't think jumblesale is arguing that his writings are incorrect or not useful, just that he doesn't like popularizing his works because of the authors political views.
- fnordfnordfnord 11y ago
  It's still a shame. I certainly don't feel like I have to love everything a person does in order to learn something from them, or even respect some of their work. Likewise, I don't require everyone to agree with my personal opinions in order to pass my courses. Things would really become cumbersome were I to ever change my mind about something.
  - camperman 11y ago
    I agree. Seriously, who gives a toss about what anyone's opinions are on subjects unrelated to what you're reading by them? And even if they do creep in, what's to say you're right or they're wrong? I thought this was part of being an adult but I see it all too often: "so-and-so wrote an excellent technical manual on X but he's right wing so I won't buy it!" I don't understand that way of thinking since no human being will ever 100% agree with any other on everything.
coldtea 11y ago
Except if he writes anything about politics, economics, society, etc -- in which case his political views have quite a bearing on the validity or usefulness of what they write.
- yummyfajitas 11y ago
  Can't you evaluate his claims on their own merits? Unless he's saying "trust me, I won't expose my reasoning but it's solid", or unless you are outsourcing your thinking, such things would seem to be irrelevant.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >Can't you evaluate his claims on their own merits? As with most things, it takes too much time to do that in detail for every argument one hears. Thankfully with the magic of brain's pattern matching and previous experience to BS arguments we don't have to. We can eliminate tons of opinions from the list of "potentially interesting to investigate" by their mere showing of certain characteristics we already know lead to bogus thinking. ("Hey man, I made a perpetual motion machine. Wait, where are you going? Don't you wanna hear how I made it? You're so close minded" -- or "I don't believe in climate change, it's all bogus. Here's what I think about educational reform..."). Sure, we might get a few false negatives (some good suggestions lost because their originator is a bigot etc), but the system overall works wonders for reducing the signal to noise ratio.
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 11y ago
      [deleted]
    - yummyfajitas 11y ago
      You are conflating a property of the claim itself (violating the laws of physics) with a straw-man property of the person making the claim. They aren't the same thing - one enables a simple proof by contradiction, the other is ad-hominem. Further, your "climate change, it's all bogus" ad hominem isn't even a real claim that skeptics make, and is more more indicative of your thinking than of reality. I get the impression you are just looking for ways to dismiss arguments which make you emotionally uncomfortable. Consider religion instead, it's a lot more unapologetic about simply declaring who the heretics are.
navait 11y ago
When they constantly mix technology and politics, yes it does matter. Open Source is a political movement, and that requires taking ESR's version of it with a grain of salt.
- angersock 11y ago
  Who did a lot of the popularization of that term again? Who cofounded the Open Source Initiative? It's in no small part due to the politicking and goodthink of ESR that we have Open Source as it is today.
- the_why_of_y 11y ago
  Open Source is not a political movement; you're thinking of Free Software.
tjr 11y ago
Further, I suspect the main reason there's any concern at all about recommending ESR's writings due to his politics is because he bothers to write a lot about his political views in the first place, presenting something to potentially disagree with. Many programmers / writers / programmer-writers may well have equally strong political views in one direction or another, with which others may strongly agree or disagree, but they just don't say much about them in public.
angersock 11y ago
Unfortunately, the general zeitgeist of the times seems to be that a person's politics are somehow a litmus test for whether or not they should be listened to at all, about anything. Normally this would just be a quirk, but the fact is that a lot of technical people here on HN and other places would happily throw the baby out with the bath water just because they disagree with somebody's politics. It's stupid and unprofessional. With so many companies focusing on such technically boring problems, image management is perhaps legitimately more of a business concern than having the best tech available. So, unfortunately, we have people with dissenting opinions but excellent work slandered or ostracized...even if their opinions are actually worth considering. Then again, that just means that those of us who are more genuinely tolerant will have an edge during hiring. :) Also, on ESR in particular: You have to understand that, rightly or wrongly, his worldview is long-term Culture War. Literally anything which prevents The Right People from breeding faster (homosexuality) or defending themselves (attacks on the 2nd amendment) or arguing (kafkatraps) is suspect. Because he's playing for keeps, he'll do whatever it takes (including, perhaps, being less than perfectly equal in presentations on things) to further his agenda. That's just how it is, and it doesn't reflect on his technical contriubtions or aptitude at all. Hell, the bitch of it is, he's even arguably correct on some of his cultural points, if he himself (much less his detractors) didn't spend so much time sounding so disagreeable and grumpy and wingnutty. Anyways, it's just a sign of the times, as I said. It seems that most people are unable to handle a mental model which accounts for biased or unreliable narrators while still allowing the work of those narrators to be taken advantage of.

spiralpolitik 11y ago

Personally I found it disappointing as it seemed to take the view that the only UNIX in existence since 1992 has been Linux. A better title would have been the Art of Linux Programming or the Art of Open Source Programming.