Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive


Forgot your password?

Comment WEAK THEORY, IMPORTANT TOPIC (Score 1) 483 483

On the surface (having not read the book in question), I'd guess this is so-called psycho-babble, but perhaps they went into more depth than the article mentions. It's along the lines of blaming genetics or chemistry for peoples' actions and choices. Even those choices we make subconcisously are still our responsibility. Through introspection and feedback from trusted friends we can learn of our traits and make adjustments if necessary. This is part of being good friends, co-workers, citizens, and people in general.

Dealing with other people is a lot more frustrating than working with incredibly precise and predictable technology (Windows excepted). It's tempting to give up on people and avoid improving our own skills in that regard, but this is irresponsible.

I think non-geeks have some very valid criticisms, and that geeks ought to come to terms with these and do something about it. It's usually better to solve a problem than to deny it and blame it on someone else. It's also better not to blame some mysterious genetic or chemical influence. Human will can overcome some incredible obstacles.

Making computers easier to use is very important. It requires us geeks to give up our arrogance and try to understand how other people see the technology that we create. It's not their stupidity that makes something hard to use, it is ours that keeps us from designing better interfaces.

BTW, I wonder if people who write and publish such books might be suffering from a mild form of megalomania?


Who ordered the double cheese and sausage?

The more data I punch in this card, the lighter it becomes, and the lower the mailing cost. -- S. Kelly-Bootle, "The Devil's DP Dictionary"