Motion Graphics

Icon

In response to Paul Graham’s “Hackers and Painters”

I think Paul Graham makes a good point when he says “computer science” is a bad coining of such a variety of people. I’ve asked people what their degrees were and they would respond with such answering and I have to ask, what exactly is it that you do? There is such a spectrum associated with computer science that it needs to be redefined.

I think its interesting when he talks about subjects for papers and being original. Graham suggest that the only way to be sure that you in new territory is to “stake out a piece of ground that no one wants.” During this information age it is very difficult to “stumble upon” a new idea since there is so much out there already. Not to mention the same idea that you have may be being developed by someone at the exact same time. Everyone has the same common source of research these days: the internet, and with that common thread of information inspiration can tend to lead many people all in the same direction with out the intention of doing so.

I agree and disagree with his statement about the only way things thrive is through time. Bad things will cease to exist and good things will strive through time. However, I think that the society we live in during the 21st century allows artists/programmers (etc.) to be more eccentric than the norm. Thinking and building outside the box is what most of us strive to do. We don’t want to follow what style has already been done before, we want to create and coin a whole new style. But this coincides with his theory that it may only be appreciated later after the creator and followers are gone.

I like how Graham correlates his painting and hacking. He explains that hacking is just like paining in that you have to learn by doing, not by reading or someone teaching you. He also talks about the progression of the hacker like a painter you have different versions of the final product, helping you learn the process. I think when he suggests that the hackers be more like painters in that they start from scratch is both a frustrating and brilliant idea. You only learn from your mistakes if you can accept that it is a mistake and move on from it. If you continue to stay with a solution that isn’t working it will only frustrate you and taking you even longer, if not ever to fix and finish the mistake.

I think Graham explains how his two extreme but yet so similar areas of study coincides very well together. He understands the process of a hacker/programmer as well as that of a painter. He knows how to apply his knowledge in one field to that of the other and this benefits him in being a better artist throughout.

I think Paul Graham makes a good point

when he says “computer science” is a bad

coining of such a variety of people. I’ve

asked people what their degrees were and

they would respond with such answering and

I have to ask, what exactly is it that you

do? There is such a spectrum associated

with computer science that it needs to be

redefined.

I think its intresting when he talks about

subjects for papers and being original.

Graham suggest that the only way to be

sure that you in new territory is to

“stake out a piece of ground that no one

wants.” During this information age it is

very difficult to “stumble upon” a new

idea since there is so much out there

already. Not to mention the same idea that

you have may be being develped by someone

at the exact same time. Everyone has the

same common source of research these days:

the internet, and with that common thread

of information inspiration can tend to

lead many people all in the same direction

with out the intention of doing so.

I agree and disagree with his statement

about the only way things thrive is

through time. Bad things will cease to

exist and good things will strive through

time. However, I think that the society we

live in during the 21st century allows

artists/programmers (etc.) to be more

eccentric than the norm. Thinking and

building outside the box is what most of

us strive to do. We dont want to follow

what style has already been done before,

we want to create and coin a whole new

style. But this coensides with his theory

that it may only be apperiated later after

the creater and followers are gone.

I like how Graham correlates his painting

and hacking. He explains that hacking is

just like paining in that you have to

learn by doing, not by reading or someone

teaching you. He also talks about the

progression of the hacker like a painter

you have different versions of the final

product, helping you learn the process. I

think when he suggests that the hackers be

more like painters in that they start from

scratch is both a fustrating and brilliant

idea. You only learn from your mistakes if

you can accept that it is a mistake and

move on from it. If you continue to stay

with a solution that isnt working it will

only fustrate you and taking you even

longer, if not ever to fix and finish the

mistake.

I think Graham explains how his two

extreme but yet so similar areas of study

coenside very well together. He

understands the process of a

hacker/programmer as well as that of a

painter. He knows how to apply his

knowledge in one field to that of the

other and this benefits him in being a

better artist throughout.

Advertisements

Filed under: Uncategorized

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: