I really wish this were the reason behind other people saying "dumb shit". I often find myself trying to reinterpret something so uninformed into an interesting angle. Example: guy trying to impress me says he's working with a programming language that "isn't even Turing Complete". I reinterpreted this to mean that perhaps he was doing some domain specific stuff, say, with Regexes or something, but I was still confused about what use he'd get out of a limited programming language like that. When I asked him about this, he became embarrassed and admitted he was just throwing the word around because he heard it somewhere and wanted to impress me. Not the best move to pull on a CS grad student.
More a sharing of experience.
I probably should have noted that internet comments are not the responses I'm talking about – no offense to you, but I'm sure you'll understand why I say that.
My favorite line from it: "There’s also a difference between asking questions and pushing back. Pushing back means you already think you know. Asking questions means you want to know. Ask more questions."
I might be oversimplifying it, but it sounds like the call to action in this gist is "Make trolling statements to smart people to evoke a passionate response. Maybe you'll learn something as they tell you off."
As a modification to tyre's protocol, the way I typically try to learn something is:
- Find a standard reference. If the subject is controversial or unsettled, the reference should note these facts but not take sides (if it's taking sides, it's by definition not a standard reference). In many cases, Wikipedia is a good first source.
- Track down a few additional references. These can be short survey articles, if necessary. Get a sense for the field.
- Find a discussion or discussions on the topic. Follow these. Unless your need is very pressing sit on your hands for the first week or so and see both what is being discussed and what cultural norms are. In particular, how are newbies and fools treated?
- If there's a FAQ, read it.
- At this point, start asking clarifying questions as to understanding, or for learning methods (depending on the topic).
Often starting with small clarification questions or references to what understanding you have may is a good way to enter discussions.
Dropping elementary questions on most groups is highly frowned on. It gets very old, very fast, and shows a lack of preparation.
I'm also self-taught in many areas, and my methods have afforded me well. Though there was that time I retorted back at Alan Cox that he was wrong regarding some aspect or other of kernel processing, according to a programmer I'd had a brief prior conversation with. Before I was fully aware of who Cox was (#2 linux developer for many years).
The following is my opinion, and from personal experience only. Maybe I am wrong, but this is what I gathered over the years:
Being naive and saying things rashly without solid, scientific backing is a normal thing. It means you are learning the hard way, and learning things in an un-scientific way, or informal way.
In college / school / work / The Internet, we are trained to be as scientific about things as possible, because it looks like we worked hard at getting an answer. i.e - We put thought and effort into our question.
Sadly, people ask questions indirectly, or subconsciously. So casually saying:
"C is an uninteresting language and no longer relevant."
Is really you trying to understand programming more, even though it seems like a statement.
I am basking in the brilliance of this post.
To build on top of what you're saying, @tyre ...
Even if you reach the brilliance of your peers, and you attain their level ---
There will always be somebody else better than you. I know this from personal experience.
I am going to speak about this topic in regard to the coding scene on Github:
Take for example hacking/coding/dev. When I first started, I had my role models. Expert coders / dev rockstars / whatever.
Then when you reach their skill level, some new guy arrives on the scene and blows everyone away.
This happens a lot on The Internet, aswell as in real life. But this competition can also be a good thing. It fosters innovation, because who can tell when you supersede your contemporaries and blow their minds too.
I've seen it happen. Little johnny unpopular can skyrocket on Github very quickly, and be respected by his role models, overnight. This is the beauty of the social web.
As a person who says way too many really really dumb things, all I can say, and at the risk of sounding dumb, again, "regret is just lessons not learned yet" or something like that. I agree, I have learned a lot in life by saying dumb things and later regretting it, but learning along the way. Continue on my friend...
This is a tactic that can work. Though it requires the capacity to learn. And often the answer will be "no, you're wrong, study the topic / read the FAQ / read the manpage".
Especially if there are all indications that someone's failed to do any work, or they're operating under either gross misinformation or exceptionally faulty logic.
Occasionally this can present a teachable moment. More frequently, the effort's wasted (or very annoyingly repetitive).
What I think he's trying to say is something my dad told me long ago (about juggling): "If you're not dropping, you're not learning". If all you're ever doing is juggling a three ball cascade (even if it's perfect) you're still not a better juggler than one who can juggle a 7 ball mills mess.
If you're the 3 ball juggler, it might actually help you to go up to the 7 ball juggler and claim their pattern is easier - as they'll probably take offence and try and teach you it.
Dig the post. The title is definitely a good way to get some clicks. But I would disagree that your first 3 examples are "stupid" things to say. They at least have some basis and are absolutely great challenging statements that can lead to awesome discussions.
It's stupid to say dumb shit just to get beaten down for it (the best people will not beat you down, but either ignore you or challenge you to think). But you shouldn't be afraid to speak your mind, always with your ears open.
he did explain why, he says dumb shit so people who are smarter than him will correct him and teach him something they might not have been willing to talk about.
This seems borderline trolling to be honest; like the real life equivalent of the IRC behavior of bursting into #linux with "Linux sucks because it can't do X" and then getting 10 different explanations on how to resolve the issue.
I do something similar to this, but it's a fairly different strategy. When I'm learning something, I assume that I have a valid working understanding - usually of CS concepts or code or what not. I repeat (to a friend/colleague/manager) that understanding and make extrapolations and relationships and confirm it. And I'm stubborn. If I say something slightly incorrect, I will reiterate "Well, I thought it was that way because of X, Y, and Z, or do I not understand". When I then have my understanding corrected, it's not just knowing that I was wrong and that A, B, C is actually right, but it also corrects my underlying mis-assumptions that caused my gaffe in the first place. So it's not just me saying "OK" now that my question was answered... I actually leave with a better fundamental understanding.
It's like the real life equivalent of "Can you repeat the word, Can you use the word in a sentence please?"
I agree with you, so I guess there are some necessary guidelines.
1) You should almost always learn from someone face to face. Whether it is in person or over Google Hangout, personal interaction lays down a baseline of respect. Yes I am implying internet forums are not the place to learn (and the irony of saying that here.)
2) Don't waste their time. Defend what you believe until you've learned why you're wrong (if you are), but don't be a dick.
It is really about starting a conversation and learning efficiently. Lob 100 softball questions at an expert and they can give you dictionary answers. Or really challenge them and you can get a framework for their entire understanding of a broader volume of knowledge.
I tend to agree with both of those, though I'm largely self-taught via Google/IRC. IRC's certainly more interactive than forums though -- after HN and reddit I absolutely refuse to use non-threaded forums.
