[Burichan] [Futaba] [Gurochan] [Photon] - [Home] [Mod]

Posting mode: Reply [Return]
Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Password (for post and file deletion)
  • Supported file types are: GIF, JPG, PNG ≤ 10 MB.
  • Images greater than 200x200 pixels will be thumbnailed.
  • Put sjis in the email field for AA formatting.
  • Rules (read before posting) — DMCA

File: 1621934070010.png (234119 B, 541x520) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.
234119 No.1648  

There seems to be a lot of people who call themselves "programmers" who are pretty useless. It seems like they are people who wanted to make games, and did some kind of programming crash course, but didn't study maths or learn any of the fundamentals. Those programmer humour portals are full of them laughing to each other how useless they are and how lost they'd be without StackOverflow users giving them the answers. I was reminded of a similar discussion here about artist poseurs. What are your thoughts?

>> No.1649  

I have a feeling that unlike artists which fight about everything bringing this up in non-anonymous will be shotdown as gatekeeping and you'll be called a techbro

>> No.1650  

I think it's just a phase while you're learning to program. Most of the people posting on those humour portals are still students.

>> No.1651  
File: 1621947157645.jpg (582936 B, 1824x1216) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Yeah, agreed. They give the impression they're at least trying to learn and get better, so I can't really feel upset at them.

>> No.1652  

>>1649 Indeed, but you'll notice I brought it up on this anonymous site. Artists that fight about everything? What do you mean?

>> No.1653  

>>1650 That's what I was getting at, self-proclaimed programmers who haven't learned the basics but call themselves programmers. It's not something that upsets me or anything, people can call themselves whatever they want, I just saw an interesting comparison after reading those attitudes towards hack artists earlier.

>> No.1654  

>>1651 I think maybe the only annoying ones are the ones that complain about having to learn maths. Well quit then, bitch!

>> No.1655  

Artists arguing about what is art, "gatekeeping", harsh even overkill criticism is normal in art communities

>> No.1656  
File: 1621963899419.gif (362619 B, 352x288) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I think it's a very different situation. With art, you could make a plausible argument along the lines of
i) Art is fundamentally a form of communication of ideas or emotions
ii) Piles of bricks or paintings that are nothing but paint splatters do not or cannot meaningfully communicate anything
iii) Therefore, people who exclusively produce those things are not producing art
iv) Therefore, those people are not artists

I don't necessarily agree with that argument, but I think it makes sense, at least. Whereas, even if they haven't learned what you or I would consider fundamental, I don't think you could make the case that somebody who produces computer programs full time is not doing programming or is not a programmer. They just might be bad at it, that's all.

I also think it may be worth bearing in mind that maybe in modern programming, the traditional fundamentals might not be as fundamental as they used to be. You probably can do a passable (though not necessarily good) job of programming in a high level language without knowing about things like time complexity, sorting algorithms, or binary.

>> No.1658  

>>1656 Premise ii isn't right, Jackson Pollock's paintings and Carl Andre's Equivalent pieces are both examples of ideas or emotions communicated by an artist. There are meanings behind the materials and presentation, and they should also be read in the larger context of history and art. For instance, much like the nonsensical art of Dada was a reaction against what they saw as the senseless violence of the First World War, Pollock's chaotic paint splatters of pure energy and motion are lit in the aftermath of two nuclear bombs - millions wiped out in a flash, what can be said after an event like that? Sometimes art tries to express things which can't be said. And, just the act of arranging sets of a certain type of bricks into certain piles, then giving each pile a name and putting them into art galleries, is itself an idea being communicated. Especially in abstract art, the viewer is supposed to bring themselves into the piece and see what it says to them, more than just a pile of bricks or random paint splatters

>> No.1659  
File: 1621979115374.jpg (77684 B, 600x600) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Maybe another comparison would be “script kiddies” calling themselves hackers?

>> No.1667  

>There seems to be a lot of people who call themselves "programmers" who are pretty useless.
Sup, I am one. It takes me half a year to write something even remotely useful. I'm doing it solo, maybe that's the reason.

>> No.1668  
File: 1622141076651.gif (1212 B, 46x17) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Gatekeeping is good.

>> No.1670  
File: 1622156886456.png (1216514 B, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I can't think of any sort of gatekeeping which doesn't boil down to arguing about things that don't really matter. Can you? Are there special gates which must be kept?

>> No.1671  

Yeah, allowing youtubers to take over the media landscape was a mistake.

>> No.1676  
File: 1622240763715.jpg (70677 B, 600x367) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

It's the idea of what your making, not how good your code looks. If what your making is just a clone of a 100 trillion dollar company than why should I even give a shit?

>> No.1682  

>>1670 plenty of things suck and should be scorned

>> No.1683  
File: 1622375626196.jpg (22632 B, 267x400) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>>1682 Gatekeeping isn't just scorning what you think sucks, I'm referring to when people within a group or scene see themselves as an authority on the subject, and feel the need to pass judgment on whether something or someone qualifies as part of "their" scene. Some examples I can think of:
- "gamers" passing judgement on who's a "true gamer"
- metal elitists, "Babymetal are NOT TRUE METAL"
- gatekeepers on both sides of the punk scene, one says "SJWs and politics should be kept out of politics" and one says "you can't be punk if you're a nazi"
- nerds getting mad at girls for wearing fashionable Ramones, Nirvana, Metallica t-shirts but can't name any of their songs
- who can and can't call themselves an artist

In each case, why should anyone give a fuck, really? So many pointless arguments in the world

>> No.1686  

That is not real gatekeeping, that is just petty argumentation. Legitimate gatekeeping is requiring a degree to practice law.

>> No.1687  

Are you seriously gatekeeping gatekeeping?

>> No.1688  

>nerds getting mad at girls for wearing fashionable Ramones, Nirvana, Metallica t-shirts but can't name any of their songs
this is a meme

>> No.1689  

>>1686 Good one! Who can and can't call themselves a doctor was an example of justified gatekeeping I could think of, qualified positions where you are responsible for other people. And that was my point, that most gatekeeping is just petty arguing. Can you think of any others?

>>1688 Indeed, a 20-year-old meme at that. It's still shitbags arguing about who can and can't wear certain items of clothing

>> No.1690  

I get that there's layers of irony to that and this situation and it's a funny statement but I suppose I do think it is right that we shouldn't call non legitimate instances of gatekeeping gatekeeping. Usually terms like elitist, arrogant, or snobby work better in those contexts. If a person says there's hardly any form of gatekeeping that matters, I'm going to think of all the legitimate examples like publishing, college education, financing, certifications, job experience, etc. I'm not going to think about somebody bullying somebody's fashion sense.

>> No.1691  

>>1690 Hmm I guess I agree, I knew there were legitimate examples like those you gave, but I'm talking about the snobby, elitist kind that people seem to usually mean online. I've heard people say things like "I'm totally against gatekeeping in any form", and I know they just mean the fandom kind of gatekeeping and not for hiring doctors, that's what got me pondering if there are any examples of that which are actually good and worthwhile. I think a banker evaluating whether someone is eligible for a loan based on their financial situation or credit score isn't the same "gatekeeping" as, say, someone saying imageboards should only be used by people who have used them since the days of dial-up or something.

By your examples, would you say someone is only a "writer" if they have had their writing published? Can self-published writers really call themselves writers? Sometimes gatekeeping is done badly in those contexts too, I'm reminded of so many job listings that ask for more years of experience in a kind of software than that software has existed for, and things like that.

>> No.1692  
File: 1622466619896.gif (3007055 B, 400x290) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I find Jim Cornette to be an interesting example, I don't agree with everything he says, but his criticisms of the crap aspects of modern pro wrestling make sense and come from a position of authority, more than just an old fogey rallying against what the kids today are doing. He's been accused of gatekeeping, but him having an opinion on what is and isn't wrestling is different to some wrestling fan's opinion, since he's been there and done it for nearly 50 years

Is it often the case that these gatekeepers just aren't willing to move with the times, unwilling to accept progress, diversity, changing tastes in their chosen realm?

>> No.1693  

I joined the Open Ministry so I can legit call myself Reverend, I can perform weddings in the US

>> No.1695  
File: 1622491282486.png (674487 B, 990x1015) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

I am no programmer, but I don't think there's anything wrong with people disliking when people don themselves with a title in something they're actually not competent in.
Corny also is being hyperbolic for comedy/entertainment a lot of the time, something a lot of his audience and his haters don't get.

>> No.1696  
File: 1622491523715.png (51067 B, 1200x1078) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

The Open Ministry isn't that unusual, a lot of NRM type beliefs also make joining very easy.
Pretty much the only western religion that has vigorous training to become clergy is Catholicism and related faiths, I think.

>> No.1697  
File: 1622496752788.jpg (86913 B, 497x478) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>>1696 That's what I mean, I can marry people in the eyes of God and call myself Rev. and I haven't even read the Bible!

>> No.1738  

Gatekeeping doesn't exist. It's just another word for ribbing

>> No.1742  
File: 1623278053591.jpg (60494 B, 583x498) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>>1738 People have serious debates online about whether or not some alternative or progressive approaches to a discipline qualify for, or can "call itself" some label. They posit themselves as an authority on their subject because they've been a fan for longer, or some other arbitrary reason, and feel they can/must decide who can and can't use a label or like the same thing they like. I've never heard "ribbing" used in this context we're talking about

>> No.1754  

If we had it your way there would be no acceptable way (or at least no way to do it without starting an argument) to call out grifters and scam artists since it would just be gatekeeping to question their credentials. Somebody who calls themselves an X but has no actual qualities of X yet still advocates on behalf of X should be gatekept. People are making six figures bullshitting about American politics right now on Twitch and they genuinely believe in nothing as demonstrated when they get any substantial pushback from their own tribes. I just don't accept the premise that it's actually unwarranted to point this out. There's a genuine phobia of "gatekeeping" in a lot of online spaces, like, it's almost pathological the amount of stuff people will defend out of fear of coming across online as haughty and telling people what to do.

>> No.1755  

>>1754 I don't think that would be my way, I sort of agree with you. I didn't mean it was always unwarranted. There is good and bad gatekeeping, some of it is pointless arguing and some of it stops people dying! But people making it say "Hello World" and calling themselves a programmer, people splatting paint with their vaginas and calling themselves artists, script kiddies calling themselves hackers, people arguing about which bands are trve metal or if it's dubstep or brostep or who's allowed to play which computer games, I mean, is it really worth arguing about? Maybe if as you say they're scamming people, but if you can sell your pussy paintings and people buy them, I guess you can call yourself an artist...

I think you're right, the thing that got me thinking about this was a guy on youtube who was defending comedy wrestling, and he earnestly declared he was TOTALLY against any form of gatekeeping. I thought that was a pretty dumb thing to say, but I'm thinking he meant the kind that was like, "only the kind of wrestling I like is real wrestling and comedy stuff or flippy stuff isn't REAL wrestling", or when guys say girls can't like comic books or something.

>> No.1812  
File: 1624021289872.jpg (133891 B, 677x548) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Never give up.

>> No.1818  

>flippy stuff isn't REAL wrestling
High flying is beat to death so much that it's like curious. Just because some wrestlers on shows are high flyers doesn't mean it's PWG! Haven't people seen Lucha?

>> No.1819  
File: 1624095558663.gif (4979232 B, 320x240) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>>1818 Yeah, they're talking about how even in lucha libre, it's often very obvious that they are cooperating. Part of the art of wrestling is making it seem like a real fight, but I don't agree entirely with the notion that they should only do things they'd do in a bar fight. It's also supposed to be an exciting show for the fans, and so obviously wrestlers doing flashier risky moves will be more popular, and make more money. But when they stand around awkwardly waiting for their opponent to climb up and jump on them when they could just step out of the way, that breaks the immersion. There are plenty of high flyers who are good at launching themselves about and making it look like a dangerous move in their arsenal, but for other ones it's just embarrassing to watch when their opponents group together so that they can catch a dude jumping from the top then slowly falling over each other...

Lots of them like Ricochet vs Ospreay are marvellous acrobatic routines, but I can understand why purists would say they're not really "wrestling matches"

>> No.2400  
File: 1633236310391.jpg (380081 B, 1535x2048) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

Too late.


>> No.2402  

they're trannies and they do it on purpose because being useless is gender affirming and makes them feel more like a girl

>> No.2472  

How very insightful. I'm starting to hate you tranny obsessed faggots far more than trannies. I have never in my life met a tranny, yet people on imageboards keep bringing them up.

>> No.2475  

Precisely what the self-loathing t-folk strive for with their efforts.

>> No.2478  

Damn poseus, why can't they be a good wageslave like me?

>> No.2479  


>> No.2480  

Poseus, the philosopher

>> No.2481  

>>2478 Totally missed the point

>> No.2492  

If you're going to call other programmers useless then I'm simply going to assume you're a wageslave mad that other people working your same area aren't wageslaving as hard as you.

>> No.2494  


>> No.2495  
File: 1634723775662.gif (2410687 B, 350x193) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size.

>>2492 Learn to read, retard

>> No.2497  

>I'm simply going to assume
Never assume because it makes u an ass

Delete Post []