Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I agree that perverse incentives are possible, but I think that stance is a bit pessimistic. Being the author of an RFC grants you no social capital unless that RFC is good enough to get accepted (and if it's good enough to get accepted, then it's a good thing someone took the time to write it!). Additionally, the amount of social capital one receives from being known as the author of an RFC is very minor (especially since Rust RFCs only represent the beginning of the conversation, not the end, and the features any given RFC describes can change drastically between RFC and eventual stabilization, and god only knows how many people are responsible for the end result by that point).

(There's only one accepted Rust RFC whose author I can name from memory, and that's only because it's an RFC that I didn't like. :P The knife cuts both ways!)




I agree with you. I'm erring on the side of exaggeration.

The thing is there's a large, quiet, ad hoc network of people and it "computes": Who's paying attention? Who's doing the work?

Keeping the normals from gumming up that network is very important, and calling [the wrong kind of] attention to it won't help...

Cf. Tao Te Ching, chp. 3




Join us for AI Startup School this June 16-17 in San Francisco!

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: