drieuxster (drieuxster) wrote,

Frame Of Reference Problems... ( or revenge of got wool? )

Continuing on the problem of 'who owns the language' issues - there is a level of comedy about coding in this or that language that is simply solved with the 'what is your best practice habits'. Which normally is well defined, tragically, after all of the truly STOOPID STUFF has been tried first.

The big tragedy is that 'naming conventions' as a construct needs to be understood well enough to know why one REALLY REALLY REALLY wants one.

Let us open up the tag wool for we own our language, and allow me to BLAME memepunk because I STILL spit coffee at the 'got wool' meme... and now I WOOT her Wool! that may not work the way that I meant it...

In another context I was inclined to say,
I do not care if you call elephants 'mice',
just make sure that when we have to fire upon them,
that you bring your MouseGun!
Which really is a bit scary, since, well that is now smelling like the start of an Interface issue....

Where I get cranky, of course, is in the realms of professionalisms, and the obligations of one group of professionals to another. I have often put together such interesting conflicts, as
If I want to limit killing to those who are members of the Guild.

Then how do I address issues of unionization and professionalism amongst C.O.Y.O.T.E.
Which at one level is a simple discussion of where are the fine lines between professionalism, and the rank amateurs? Even more fuggly in an age of Open Source Software Development. Can we have professional citizens? are somethings to important to leave to those who merely make a living from the thingies????

How should we go about defining who got wool and who is merely messing with the specs for no apparent good reasons....

Or is it good enough that we start by differentiating the abuses of language, such as when a given language stream is being used not for any useful denotative value, but simply for the warm cuddly wuddlies that come with using that stream.

On the flip side of that, is the false rejection, when neoLiberals fail to understand that some things are not only 'not good' but rise to a level of doublePlusUnGood that invokes strong emotions! But it is the reality of the context, that causes the emotive response! At least in any life form that is not merely engaged in symbol manipulation, but can also have an actual emotive response! So to reject a given 'wide factual' merely because it causes an emotional response, is, at best DORKY, and in too many ways dehumanizing!!!

What if language were a part of a wholeist human experience, and not merely a collection of annotations and markings, that allow for the dull tedious symbol manipulation, which all too often is confused as things like 'software development', or Being Reasonable....

What if we had to own our language?
Tags: memewar, wool

  • The men who stare at Goats

    Saw the film today. It was, as expected disturbing, and unsettling. But I think the adverts for the films before were even more unsettling. We walked…

  • Design gambits

    Hey kids, what if you had two competing cartridges? the S&W .44 and the .44 colt and you are competing to replace the old fashion, god fearing, all…

  • What should GlennBeckistania's response be to new bombing in Iraq?

    Hum.... GlennBeckIstanianista have been opposing the Commander In Chief. Now we have terrorist bombings in Baghdad also attacking the Commander In…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.