A nice point, but isn't this post a bit hollow? After all, you'd expect someone like Seth Godin to put forward a well-supported argument about a radically new approach (new hammer) and its benefits?
>> A nice point, but isn't this post a bit hollow?
It is, but I find all of Seth's posts are this way. He is good at formulating ideas which seems obvious after you read them. ;-) But I don't consider him being some deep thinker who could put forward some "radically new approach".
He said himself a while back that he makes his blog posts short on purpose so that his point doesn't get dilluted in a sea of text.
FWIW, I think the point wasn't to suggest that there is some new hammer; just that you should be aware that there's a very high chance you're not seeing a bigger picture due to confirmation bias or whatever.
The massive burst in innovation that we've seen in the past several decades is caused by a bunch of people making a bunch of new hammers for a bunch of different problem types. In addition, there are certain hammers -- like statistical methods or X-rays or computer networking -- that can be applied to a ranging scope of problems that no one ever predicted before.
Seth is right, you have to find the right tool for the job. But your job is also to imagine and construct a new hammer.
Not a bad point. People tend to solve problems in the way that they tend to build problems (tautologically.)
At least in my own experience, engineers tend to solve problems by building things to solve the problems. Sometimes the answer is to remove parts until those problems don't exist.
"Metaprogramming" in its various forms is often about switching tools to the most appropriate one. Instead of opening that can with only a hammer, you first fabricate a screwdriver.
(Disclaimer: I advocate metaprogramming. Also humor.)
[+] [-] lecha|16 years ago|reply
[+] [-] greyman|16 years ago|reply
It is, but I find all of Seth's posts are this way. He is good at formulating ideas which seems obvious after you read them. ;-) But I don't consider him being some deep thinker who could put forward some "radically new approach".
[+] [-] jamesbressi|16 years ago|reply
All his posts are "a bit hollow".
He tries to provoke thought, not offer solutions.
There is nothing wrong with that; just a new age philosopher?
OFF Topic: I wish he would have offered a link to the study he mentioned. That would be like someone blogging about him and not offering a link.
[+] [-] lhorie|16 years ago|reply
FWIW, I think the point wasn't to suggest that there is some new hammer; just that you should be aware that there's a very high chance you're not seeing a bigger picture due to confirmation bias or whatever.
[+] [-] martian|16 years ago|reply
The massive burst in innovation that we've seen in the past several decades is caused by a bunch of people making a bunch of new hammers for a bunch of different problem types. In addition, there are certain hammers -- like statistical methods or X-rays or computer networking -- that can be applied to a ranging scope of problems that no one ever predicted before.
Seth is right, you have to find the right tool for the job. But your job is also to imagine and construct a new hammer.
[+] [-] joshu|16 years ago|reply
At least in my own experience, engineers tend to solve problems by building things to solve the problems. Sometimes the answer is to remove parts until those problems don't exist.
[+] [-] stcredzero|16 years ago|reply
(Disclaimer: I advocate metaprogramming. Also humor.)
[+] [-] jauco|16 years ago|reply
http://discuss.joelonsoftware.com/default.asp?joel.3.219431....
[+] [-] benmathes|16 years ago|reply
The key skills is being able to tell when you're stuck using hammer because it's what you're familiar with, and he doesn't discuss that at all.
[+] [-] ian00|16 years ago|reply