User: Password:
Subscribe / Log in / New account

Paying nVidia

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 18, 2007 3:03 UTC (Thu) by mattmelton (subscriber, #34842)
In reply to: Paying nVidia by mattmelton
Parent article: LCA: The state of the Nouveau project


I asked for no flames. The LWN community has let me down. A previous LWN edition with a letter to the editor points to a downturn in LWN comment quality recently. I concur. (this IS a flame)

I was not trolling or flaming intentionally. I gave my honest opinion as someone in the gaming industry. If anyone has studied physics or maths at a masters level, and then engaged in 3d software development, I welcome a rebuttal.

Interestingly, there's an issue I've come to recognise between business owners and doctors/surgeons/consultants since medicine is in my family.. It's quite a simple issue: business men/doctors/surgeons/consultants don't like to be criticised. I feel I've criticised people who *think* they can successfully perform at the same level as an nVidia employee (or, frightened those who aspire). I apologise if I belittled anyone - specially the abstract XML gurus out there (etc) - by my labelling. I directed nothing at no one. I merely stated what I saw in the employment market place.

There are people who can perform at a distinctive level no matter their programming 'label'. While I did not acknowledge this, I regret not mentioning it.

(Log in to post comments)

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 18, 2007 4:25 UTC (Thu) by jwb (guest, #15467) [Link]

You posted flame bait and were flamed. Why are you surprised? You can't undo a flame (nor flame bait) with a parenthetical clause. For the same reasons, you can't head off an argument by ending your argumentative post with "I don't want to argue about this."

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 18, 2007 4:54 UTC (Thu) by modernjazz (guest, #4185) [Link]

I have a PhD in physics and I write 3d software (or even n-d software,
take that!). Expertise is partly a matter of having some ability, but
perhaps more a matter of devoting the time to master a subject---and once
you've done so, it usually seems quite easy and straightforward. (As a
mathematician would say, "trivial!") But I don't know a damn thing about
writing even bare-bones HTML, so I guess I'm both a genius and a dunce in
your hierarchy.

My personal view is that hierarchies like the one you proposed tend to be
more confusing than helpful: there is a range of talent in every field,
and the standard deviation within a community often exceeds the
difference in means between communities. Yes, some fields are
unapproachable without a certain baseline ability, and that tends to
guarantee that most of the people working in them are at least decent.
But one also finds that absolutely terrific people pop up in the
strangest of places. Unfortunately, it's harder to remember this if you
also maintain a mental hierarchy.

I guess it's part of the power of open source: an acknowledgement that,
sometimes, the person with the best idea may be "out there" and without
any obvious credentials, other than the code s/he writes.

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 18, 2007 13:57 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]

I don't concur about the comment quality - but if I did, I'd be citing this comment as an example. First of all, you post something inflammatory and then expect it not to be challenged; secondly, when it is challenged you complain that because you asked to get away with it, you should have been let off; thirdly, you state that you'll only listen to different opinions from a class of people whose qualifications you (in your magnanimity) recognise - which is just plain intellectual snobbery. You say that professionals don't like to be criticised - but you've failed to demonstrate any ability to respond to criticism yourself.

At best, that's an extremely immature way to conduct yourself - and I know, having been guilty of it when I was a kid - and at worst it's trollish behaviour. Please don't do it any more.

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 21, 2007 22:39 UTC (Sun) by mattmelton (subscriber, #34842) [Link]

I disagree with what you've said. And this is why.

Your type of comment and attitude is something I am not familiar with at LWN. With the exception of a few inter-developer debates spreading over from LKML, if there was a non-hostile post which did not troll or flame, people posted positive or non-negative criticism at the very least.

You have not. Instead you take initiative to flame me and my response and my applolgy. You are NOT constructive. You are very negative.

Unlike yours (yes, it's personal as you took the time to flame me), my initial post was clear and informative.
* I study where someone has applied for a post at nVidia.
* I have been told in no uncertain words what to expect and what level I am supposed to be at before apply to a company like nVidia
* I have my foot at the bottom rung of a very tall ladder.
* And I gave my opinion on where I see programmers standing.

If you have an issue with what I said, then by all means please reply with something along the lines of, "I disagree with your hierarchy - i don't believe its right to..." etc

Getting passed the flare of what people write is hard nowadays. The problem is, Lysse, that I believe you're really not annoyed about the nVidia issue on which I commented on; you're not annoyed at the perspective I chose to talk from; and you're not annoyed by the way I apologised to the people I mislabelled in my rather sweeping comment. I honestly think you're annoyed about the sweeping hierarchy statement and that I sided with nVidia. I believe you disliked my comment so much - to the degree that it personally insulted you - and that any attempt by myself to correct it has only caused you to insult me directly.

Could this be a deep rooted dislike or jealousy of "plain intellectual snobbery" in you? Maybe it's hard to refrain from constructively building a comment when "plain intellectual snobbery" becomes a front, and this is what rushed you to insult me, rather than the issue I was commenting on.

I could go on about how "plain intellectual snobbery" actually adds to ones experience and ability; and that qualifications (plain intellectual snobbery) are nothing to scoff at. But again, I'm sure that "plain intellectual snobbery" might get in the way of what I'm trying to say, and that you'd attack me again.

I've just re-read what I've said, and I still don't see it as anything more than a neutral opinion - one I only ever so lightly support I might add.

If the rolls were reversed, and you had posted my comment (I'm not proclaiming you ever would here), I would have either
* not felt the need to reply
* replied constructively, adding new information into the debate
* replied without trolling or flaming, but offering an opinion that perhaps I was a little too generic.

You did none of these. You are flaming, and you are trolling. You are inciting my to reply (I'm a fool for doing so) and adding to what I've grown to dislike in LWN comments.

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 22, 2007 5:33 UTC (Mon) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link]

mattmelon, please stop. You seem to be posting the very type of comment you claim to not like to see. You complain bitterly about the level of discourse on LWN and call someone a troll in that very same message.

If you're joking, sir, I salute you. The irony is most impressive.

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 25, 2007 11:35 UTC (Thu) by lysse (guest, #3190) [Link]

Likewise, when I step in a pile of, er, second-user dog food in my local park, I curse the dog because I believe the creature personally insulted me.

*sigh* I hate to say it, but I believe the time has come for an "ignore user" feature.

Paying nVidia

Posted Jan 18, 2007 20:01 UTC (Thu) by dw (subscriber, #12017) [Link]

Both your comments (in addition to this one) offer no meaningful or on-topic content at all. Furthermore, your original comment is rude and insulting, "random type X is better than Y DONT CONTRADICT ME!". Life just doesn't work that way.

Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds