Never Heard of It(alistapart.com)
alistapart.com
Never Heard of It
http://alistapart.com/column/never-heard-of-it
43 comments
“Sass’s new placeholder syntax is pretty great, isn’t it?”
You say: "I haven't taken a look at it yet, what do you like about it?"
They say whatever.
You say: "Wow, that does sound pretty great, I'll definitely have to check that out." And then you do so, sure.
Human psychology is such that they often will actually react by liking you BETTER than if you had (presumably truthfully) said "Oh, yeah, it's great." Because you demonstrated that you valued their opinion, listened to their opinion, and then told them that they were right on!
You say: "I haven't taken a look at it yet, what do you like about it?"
They say whatever.
You say: "Wow, that does sound pretty great, I'll definitely have to check that out." And then you do so, sure.
Human psychology is such that they often will actually react by liking you BETTER than if you had (presumably truthfully) said "Oh, yeah, it's great." Because you demonstrated that you valued their opinion, listened to their opinion, and then told them that they were right on!
It's a bit more of embarrassing if you're the Sass consultant and the client is the one bringing it up. At least, that was what I gathered from the article.
Yes, but it's just an ego thing.
It's more than just ego - if your value proposition to the client is that you know more about Sass than they do, admitting ignorance undermines your value to them and your credibility as an expert. This, in turn, could (at least in your mind) threaten your contract, and your chances at securing future contracts.
A SASS consultant? Is there such a thing?
I don't think there is any shame in learning from clients. In effect, whenever you talk to a client about requirements, you are asking them to teach you about their problems domain. As a consultant who develops things whether web sites or software, your value to the client is not in the completeness of your prior knowledge, but in your ability to execute upon their requirements and deliver the solutions that they need. So if they can teach you the occasional technical trick, this is just fine.
I don't think there is any shame in learning from clients. In effect, whenever you talk to a client about requirements, you are asking them to teach you about their problems domain. As a consultant who develops things whether web sites or software, your value to the client is not in the completeness of your prior knowledge, but in your ability to execute upon their requirements and deliver the solutions that they need. So if they can teach you the occasional technical trick, this is just fine.
Hell, whenever someone tells me something I don't know, I find it a great opportunity to both learn something new (and probably cool) and to talk to another person about something that excites us both. Win/win.
Interesting that this comes from a woman. In my experience this is mostly men that systematically cover up not knowing or not understanding.
I always know that when I have to talk to a group of women I have to be well prepared. Men are generally easy to bullshit, they won't ask questions like "could you explain exactly how that works?", at least not in front of their peers. Women seem to have less of an issue with it, especially when there are no men around to give them condescending looks.
I always know that when I have to talk to a group of women I have to be well prepared. Men are generally easy to bullshit, they won't ask questions like "could you explain exactly how that works?", at least not in front of their peers. Women seem to have less of an issue with it, especially when there are no men around to give them condescending looks.
Women suffer from imposter syndrome[0] more than men and seem somewhat less confident about their abilities in a variety of metrics (e.g. they contribute to wikipedia articles related to their area of expertise less than equally qualified men. They feel less confident speaking at conferences. The ADA initiative has a good piece on this [1] )
---note: this is not anything to do with actual capabilities!---
Regardless of what causes this difference (cultural, social, biological, monkey-based evo psych, whatever) I would bet it is a factor here. So I posit that men may cover up their lack of knowledge, but it may also be a confidence issue - perhaps the men actually feel like they know already, and the women are less sure of their own knowledge.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome
[1] http://adainitiative.org/2013/08/is-impostor-syndrome-keepin...
---note: this is not anything to do with actual capabilities!---
Regardless of what causes this difference (cultural, social, biological, monkey-based evo psych, whatever) I would bet it is a factor here. So I posit that men may cover up their lack of knowledge, but it may also be a confidence issue - perhaps the men actually feel like they know already, and the women are less sure of their own knowledge.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impostor_syndrome
[1] http://adainitiative.org/2013/08/is-impostor-syndrome-keepin...
Yes, it's great to speculate on these things, as long as we rigorously discourage people from speculating that men are better than women in any dimension. We can have an academic discussion on the differences between men and women while avoiding sexism.
Should we rigorously discourage people from speculating that women are better than men in any dimension?
The men know everything syndrome.
I think you can genuinely believe that you know something until you are called out on it, only to realise that you can't even explain it.
If you don't know something just reply 'I don't know.' followed by 'Can you explain that to me?', you might be met with stunned silence. Or better still someone will have a go at explaining something. Sometimes the process of explaining it helps you cement your understanding. When working alone I really miss that type of interaction.
I think you can genuinely believe that you know something until you are called out on it, only to realise that you can't even explain it.
If you don't know something just reply 'I don't know.' followed by 'Can you explain that to me?', you might be met with stunned silence. Or better still someone will have a go at explaining something. Sometimes the process of explaining it helps you cement your understanding. When working alone I really miss that type of interaction.
> I think you can genuinely believe that you know something until you are called out on it, only to realise that you can't even explain it.
When I was a young boy, my mom always used to tell me that the true benchmark of whether you understand something is whether you can explain it to someone else. It's a great self-checking habit to form indeed, because relating knowledge forces one to organize it and whittle it down to essentials, and often new insights spring forth in the process. So I really frequently grab someone blessed with curiosity and just talk at them about what I'm doing.
Good old mom wisdom.
When I was a young boy, my mom always used to tell me that the true benchmark of whether you understand something is whether you can explain it to someone else. It's a great self-checking habit to form indeed, because relating knowledge forces one to organize it and whittle it down to essentials, and often new insights spring forth in the process. So I really frequently grab someone blessed with curiosity and just talk at them about what I'm doing.
Good old mom wisdom.
Yeah, I just worry about how men will fare in an equal society where mens inherent inferiority isn't (more than) made up for by the patriarchy.
I honestly don't even know what to say to sexist drivel like this. Since several replies to the parent have gone along the same lines of making overly generalizing misandric statements that would be rightly called out as sexist gibberish if said about women, I suppose I'll just reply to this most egregious of the lot:
Where have all the smart hackers gone who're so quick to point out that society is at fault when negative characters of overly-stereotyped women are raised? If I were to play their role -- and tacitly accept this farcical charade that men are all bluster and ego -- I'd point out that the reason that some men might be less inclined than some women to admit they don't know the answer to something is that they know that they'll be held accountable for not knowing that thing. In this stereotyped version of reality over which we all seem to be forming a merry echo-chamber, women are unlikely to be brutally admonished for being wrong or incompetent (perhaps because those around them expect no better of them, due to negative stereotypes). This gives them the freedom to admit they're wrong, or that they don't know a given thing. Men, on the other hand, will be held accountable for their lack of knowledge, making it a much riskier endeavour to admit they don't know something.
Of course, this entire commentary presupposes that this phenomenon even exists. My team (half male, half female), shows this 'desire to be seen as knowledgeable' as a corollary of age and gender combined: the oldest member of the team never says 'could you explain that to me', and always attempts to BS his way through conversations, but the younger 20-something aged male members of the team are perfectly happy to admit it when they're out of their depth. Maybe this is unique to us? I doubt it: somehow I expect that this stereotype -- much like all other common stereotypes -- is overly broad and downright moronic.
Where have all the smart hackers gone who're so quick to point out that society is at fault when negative characters of overly-stereotyped women are raised? If I were to play their role -- and tacitly accept this farcical charade that men are all bluster and ego -- I'd point out that the reason that some men might be less inclined than some women to admit they don't know the answer to something is that they know that they'll be held accountable for not knowing that thing. In this stereotyped version of reality over which we all seem to be forming a merry echo-chamber, women are unlikely to be brutally admonished for being wrong or incompetent (perhaps because those around them expect no better of them, due to negative stereotypes). This gives them the freedom to admit they're wrong, or that they don't know a given thing. Men, on the other hand, will be held accountable for their lack of knowledge, making it a much riskier endeavour to admit they don't know something.
Of course, this entire commentary presupposes that this phenomenon even exists. My team (half male, half female), shows this 'desire to be seen as knowledgeable' as a corollary of age and gender combined: the oldest member of the team never says 'could you explain that to me', and always attempts to BS his way through conversations, but the younger 20-something aged male members of the team are perfectly happy to admit it when they're out of their depth. Maybe this is unique to us? I doubt it: somehow I expect that this stereotype -- much like all other common stereotypes -- is overly broad and downright moronic.
Poe's law. I was being sarcastic but if I weren't I would have written something along the lines of what you wrote.
Ah, I was half debating whether or not you were being sarcastic, but I spend a lot of time in feminist communities, and a lot of the people there say a lot of things like that (they don't really seem to have understood feminism much).
"Women seem to have less of an issue with it, especially when there are no men around to give them condescending looks."
I think that's the point right there: in the tech work space, it IS mostly men. Someone may speak up once or twice to ask a question, but when surrounded by people who generally don't, you just don't feel like being the annoying one all the time who holds up discussion.
[deleted]
The smartest person in the room is usually the one asking a lot of questions about the stuff they don't know. Particularly if there's an expert there to answer them in a manner that provides more insight than your typical Google search.
I've always appreciated interviewing job candidates that would respond with an honest "Hmm, I actually don't know" rather than trying to BS their way through a question for which they obviously didn't know the answer. Expecting even great developers to know 100% of everything is unrealistic.
I hear you. But the flip side to that is that probably comes from a hiring/recruiting/interviewing culture that features this anti-pattern:
"Let's see here, you've done C programming, C++, Java, Python, Javascript, shipped lots of great working software, fixed all kinds of bugs, worked in all these domains, various platforms, clearly shown mastery/application of concepts that are core and universal to software development such as A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L and M... Yet. Do you have any ActionScript 3.0 experience?"
"I'm aware of it. I know what it is. But never written a line of code in it, no. It is almost exactly like Javascript, however, which I've been writing and working with since 1997."
"No ActionScript? Sorry. You're not qualified then for this position. Best of luck with your search."
repeat ad nauseum
"Let's see here, you've done C programming, C++, Java, Python, Javascript, shipped lots of great working software, fixed all kinds of bugs, worked in all these domains, various platforms, clearly shown mastery/application of concepts that are core and universal to software development such as A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L and M... Yet. Do you have any ActionScript 3.0 experience?"
"I'm aware of it. I know what it is. But never written a line of code in it, no. It is almost exactly like Javascript, however, which I've been writing and working with since 1997."
"No ActionScript? Sorry. You're not qualified then for this position. Best of luck with your search."
repeat ad nauseum
Fortunately, the market for expertise with computers is hot enough, that we don't have to work at these clueless companies.
kind of agree... but in the most abstract general case and in the longer term
but in specific cases and events and encounters, and in the near term, in that pesky fractal nature of reality: no, I disagree. sometimes some people DO have to deal with such clueless companies. there are certain economic-related imperatives at play for lots of people, and information and opportunity is NOT perfectly and evenly distributed in the real world, as it is in theoryland.
but in specific cases and events and encounters, and in the near term, in that pesky fractal nature of reality: no, I disagree. sometimes some people DO have to deal with such clueless companies. there are certain economic-related imperatives at play for lots of people, and information and opportunity is NOT perfectly and evenly distributed in the real world, as it is in theoryland.
Oh mannnnnnnn do I wish I met some more interviewers like you. I have mounds of experience with programming but not all of it is web-focused, and when I went through interviews I was constantly shut down because I didn't know a particular js or testing framework (RoR world, where there isn't a prescribed consistent stack that is generally used on all projects).
Finally I got to a corporation who looked at my track record & audio master's degree, said "damn you must be smart!" & hired me on the spot. I had finally gotten an offer for an RoR position as well at almost the same time but I can't tell you how many interviewers flat-out turned me down for not knowing some random piece of pseudo-hobbyist tech.
Anyone applying for a job in one of those ecosystems should spend ~3 hrs a day Googling these things & coming up with some talking points. I wish I could recommend just saying "I don't know" but I can tell you most interviewers don't get it. Better to just say a couple cursory things you read on the library's wiki page, then "I haven't used it in production though..."
Finally I got to a corporation who looked at my track record & audio master's degree, said "damn you must be smart!" & hired me on the spot. I had finally gotten an offer for an RoR position as well at almost the same time but I can't tell you how many interviewers flat-out turned me down for not knowing some random piece of pseudo-hobbyist tech.
Anyone applying for a job in one of those ecosystems should spend ~3 hrs a day Googling these things & coming up with some talking points. I wish I could recommend just saying "I don't know" but I can tell you most interviewers don't get it. Better to just say a couple cursory things you read on the library's wiki page, then "I haven't used it in production though..."
'I don't know' is never a good answer. If someone asks you about some specific javascript testing framework, for example, and your answer is simply 'I don't know', that implies that you know nothing about javascript testing. Replying 'I don't know about X, but I've worked with Y in the past, and heard about Z' is an answer that shows that you are familiar with the problem space, which is vastly more important than knowing some random piece of tech.
heh I agree with you conceptually but I've been in talks that are like (given X is a concept/library/framework) "I don't know about X, but --" "Oh you don't know about X? We don't want to know or understand anything about people who don't BELIEVE in X. You're disGUSting!"
But I never said I personally don't agree with the technique... so the response I go with is "Well, I agree with the philosophy there but my previous employers didn't budget any time for X." which they seem to absolutely hate anyway.
The reason I ultimately went corporate was because the hiring practices were more algorithm/concept-based (web services, AJAX practices, software design principles) rather than library or language-specific. I was hired into a Java team without even knowing Java. About 3 months later I found I could program on any part of their stack if they really needed me to.
Hiring practices that are not based on assessing a candidate's capabilities strike me as egotistical and pessimistic. I'm going to keep reading theoretical Comp Sci texts to see if I can get to the next phase of my career rather than joining the learn-every-framwork-under-the-sun-OR-ELSE movement.
But I never said I personally don't agree with the technique... so the response I go with is "Well, I agree with the philosophy there but my previous employers didn't budget any time for X." which they seem to absolutely hate anyway.
The reason I ultimately went corporate was because the hiring practices were more algorithm/concept-based (web services, AJAX practices, software design principles) rather than library or language-specific. I was hired into a Java team without even knowing Java. About 3 months later I found I could program on any part of their stack if they really needed me to.
Hiring practices that are not based on assessing a candidate's capabilities strike me as egotistical and pessimistic. I'm going to keep reading theoretical Comp Sci texts to see if I can get to the next phase of my career rather than joining the learn-every-framwork-under-the-sun-OR-ELSE movement.
Look at it another way.
Would you have wanted to work with people who are so short-sighted anyway?
As anyone who conceptually can't understand that it doesn't matter that JS testing framework 1 is going to be similar to testing frameworks 2, 3 & 4 is probably going to be populated by a whole load of crap, probably mono-linguistic, developers.
A lot of development jobs & the developers that work in those jobs, suck. And they're going to be pretty painful if you care about code.
I was at a talk last night and the speaker was talking about how to help new developers when they first start in a company and he started going on about giving the new developers access to the live servers & FTPing the changes to the live server, etc., etc.
All I could think is 'right, that company is now a never work for, avoid people who have worked there'.
No automated deployment? Having to give new developers access to live servers? In 2013? Pathetic.
Would you have wanted to work with people who are so short-sighted anyway?
As anyone who conceptually can't understand that it doesn't matter that JS testing framework 1 is going to be similar to testing frameworks 2, 3 & 4 is probably going to be populated by a whole load of crap, probably mono-linguistic, developers.
A lot of development jobs & the developers that work in those jobs, suck. And they're going to be pretty painful if you care about code.
I was at a talk last night and the speaker was talking about how to help new developers when they first start in a company and he started going on about giving the new developers access to the live servers & FTPing the changes to the live server, etc., etc.
All I could think is 'right, that company is now a never work for, avoid people who have worked there'.
No automated deployment? Having to give new developers access to live servers? In 2013? Pathetic.
When people say you shouldn't be afraid to say I don't know they don't mean say 'I don't know' and then stare in silence at the person asking the question.
How you phrase the whole response is important, as it is with every response in an interview, but what more people need to realize that the phrase 'I don't know' is not something that should never be uttered or admitted.
How you phrase the whole response is important, as it is with every response in an interview, but what more people need to realize that the phrase 'I don't know' is not something that should never be uttered or admitted.
I think "I don't know" can be a perfectly acceptable answer. It's certainly preferable to awkward grasping at straws. I don't expect even a great candidate to answer every question. Sometimes questions are simple probes to find bounds of knowledge and experience.
I know a lot about game development. I've shipped quite a few games. I've worked on PC, consoles, iOS, gameplay, engines, clients, game servers, and more. I've never worked on the server backend infrastructure, graphics programmer, nor have I used Unity3D.
If you ask me a real question about SQL or database management just about the only answer I can give you is "I don't know". I can't to tell you any differences, pros, or cons related to any javascript library nor any of the now numerous popular databases.
I know a lot about game development. I've shipped quite a few games. I've worked on PC, consoles, iOS, gameplay, engines, clients, game servers, and more. I've never worked on the server backend infrastructure, graphics programmer, nor have I used Unity3D.
If you ask me a real question about SQL or database management just about the only answer I can give you is "I don't know". I can't to tell you any differences, pros, or cons related to any javascript library nor any of the now numerous popular databases.
Employers generally suck. They want someone who already knows, or lies about knowing, their pet 12 technologies, but then they aren't using 6 of them at all.
And there is very little brand new stuff out there. If you've been around the block a few times, you recognize the patterns of what something does quickly enough.
And there is very little brand new stuff out there. If you've been around the block a few times, you recognize the patterns of what something does quickly enough.
My sentiments exactly. If they have a well-built internal library that is heavy on specific design patterns I'd expect them to give me a hard time over it because I could break some serious stuff or waste a ton of money writing ineffective code. Or maybe if they use heavy black-box builder tools that require some delicate coding to leverage the power of the internals. (In this case again, though, it's still dangerous to hire based on experience with a specific tool because you may get spaghetti code that happens to work within the confines of that tool -- trust me I've seen it.)
But open source frameworks & js libraries are much closer to the realm of pet tech. The internals aren't too heavy & conceptually difficult, and most of the classes I see being written by developers are pretty run-of-the-mill regardless of the language/framework. The strange thing is that often the fact that companies are so up-to-date with current trends gives away the fact that they are writing tons of throwaway code. Nobody is maintaining a really mature library that depends on a framework that has been stable for 4 months. Employers would never admit that though, lol.
But open source frameworks & js libraries are much closer to the realm of pet tech. The internals aren't too heavy & conceptually difficult, and most of the classes I see being written by developers are pretty run-of-the-mill regardless of the language/framework. The strange thing is that often the fact that companies are so up-to-date with current trends gives away the fact that they are writing tons of throwaway code. Nobody is maintaining a really mature library that depends on a framework that has been stable for 4 months. Employers would never admit that though, lol.
There's a Japanese saying I came across recently while reading the book Tokyo Vice:
"To ask a question is a shame for a moment. Not to ask the question is a shame for your whole life."
(The author of the book, a newspaper reporter covering crime and the Yakuza, gets very far in his career by asking "dumb" questions.)
"To ask a question is a shame for a moment. Not to ask the question is a shame for your whole life."
(The author of the book, a newspaper reporter covering crime and the Yakuza, gets very far in his career by asking "dumb" questions.)
This post hit the nail on the head for me. This (the first few sections mainly) is something I have been doing for years and am trying to get better with. It makes me happy to know I'm not the only one that does this. Great article, Lyza!
I appreciate the post addresses the fears in admitting you don't know about something, but I also think it's fair to attack the validity of the question itself assuming the original question was asked in a similar way to how it was presented.
> Sass’s new placeholder syntax is pretty great, isn’t it?
This question could be considered a leading question, especially when considering the context: I don't write CSS at all, and never have heard of it - why are you assuming I know what it is? I regularly write CSS, but don't know how to use Saas - why are you assuming I use Saas and find it useful? I've used Saas in the past, find it confusing, and have decided to stick to CSS - why are you assuming a tool you use is a tool I should also want use and like?
Just ask the question in a way that doesn't make assumptions!
> Sass’s new placeholder syntax is pretty great, isn’t it?
This question could be considered a leading question, especially when considering the context: I don't write CSS at all, and never have heard of it - why are you assuming I know what it is? I regularly write CSS, but don't know how to use Saas - why are you assuming I use Saas and find it useful? I've used Saas in the past, find it confusing, and have decided to stick to CSS - why are you assuming a tool you use is a tool I should also want use and like?
Just ask the question in a way that doesn't make assumptions!
> One of their developers was giving an informal presentation about their progress
The example wasn't an interview question. It seems like a perfectly normal question you'd ask a fellow developer in the course of working on a project.
Every time you ask a question you're making assumptions about prior experience.
The example wasn't an interview question. It seems like a perfectly normal question you'd ask a fellow developer in the course of working on a project.
Every time you ask a question you're making assumptions about prior experience.
I do this sometimes, but no longer because I fear looking ignorant. Unfortunately, I've realized that most people are really bad at explaining things. It's not their fault, teaching is hard, but I often find asking questions to the wrong person can lead to a hard to escape, but well meaning tech rant that I can't remotely discern because it relies too much on domain knowledge. I often find that it's easier to just look it up on my own.
I do this a lot in math class, actually. The professor goes "so X leads to Y, right? RIGHT?" and I just nod and say yes or otherwise he won't get on to the next thing. I'll understand it better when I can read it in the book.
A lot of it has to do with the culture of shame that causes us to posture in the first place. We bullshit because we're afraid of what the other person's reaction will be like.
I feel fortunate to work for a company that has a zero-tolerance policy for shaming others and their code knowledge. In fact, it's much more common to hear something like "I'm not familiar with that - could you teach me?" instead. Weekly, we show off new tools or techniques we've discovered so the chances of being left in the dark are slimmer. It leads to a lot more open discussions and a better overall base of knowledge across the entire company.
I feel fortunate to work for a company that has a zero-tolerance policy for shaming others and their code knowledge. In fact, it's much more common to hear something like "I'm not familiar with that - could you teach me?" instead. Weekly, we show off new tools or techniques we've discovered so the chances of being left in the dark are slimmer. It leads to a lot more open discussions and a better overall base of knowledge across the entire company.
Something that has been bothering me lately about my company is that the technical founders will make snide comments about old parts of our code base, parts usually written by people who aren't at the company any longer. I'm generally pretty well respected so I don't get these sorts of comments about my code (at least to my face!), but it still makes me less comfortable working here.
The other day, one of the founders was joking about how bad some CSS was on a particular page, not realizing that I was the one who wrote the CSS. I just laughed. I wrote that CSS 4 years ago when I had no idea what I was doing, and it took 4 years for anyone to notice a problem with it. It doesn't matter how smart you are. It takes time to develop skills and good practices, and shaming other people is really counterproductive.
The other day, one of the founders was joking about how bad some CSS was on a particular page, not realizing that I was the one who wrote the CSS. I just laughed. I wrote that CSS 4 years ago when I had no idea what I was doing, and it took 4 years for anyone to notice a problem with it. It doesn't matter how smart you are. It takes time to develop skills and good practices, and shaming other people is really counterproductive.
At least you were doing some form of code review.
Generally when doing web work our team is ultimately pushed for time. The solution normally complies with the request, but most of us are embarrassed with the code, and hope for a time to sort it out later, only to never get that time. There's always a flaw.
Generally when doing web work our team is ultimately pushed for time. The solution normally complies with the request, but most of us are embarrassed with the code, and hope for a time to sort it out later, only to never get that time. There's always a flaw.
Well, I wouldn't call demeaning comments about code (that we aren't actively looking at, written by someone who isn't present) a "code review." Usually words like "shitty" and "really bad" are thrown out without any specifics given. And the work environment is not so different at our company. The CEO wants it done yesterday, and he cares more about it working than what the technical founders think of your coding style ...
I actually quite like my job, so I shouldn't be complaining so much. I just wish that some of the people I work with weren't so judgmental.
I actually quite like my job, so I shouldn't be complaining so much. I just wish that some of the people I work with weren't so judgmental.
When you're new to the game, it's quite easy to admit gaps in your knowledge and pick up on what you're missing.
One reason why this remains a persistent problem, I've found, is that the more experience you gain, the more likely people are to treat you like a guru - or worse, the guru - which makes it more difficult to say "Sorry, I've not heard of that... could you fill me in?".
One reason why this remains a persistent problem, I've found, is that the more experience you gain, the more likely people are to treat you like a guru - or worse, the guru - which makes it more difficult to say "Sorry, I've not heard of that... could you fill me in?".
Pfft. If you're 'the guru', you're even more free to admit you don't know something.
BRIAN:
I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand?! Honestly!
GIRL:
Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
http://web.archive.org/web/20071002103358/http://www.mwscomp...
BRIAN:
I'm not the Messiah! Will you please listen? I am not the Messiah, do you understand?! Honestly!
GIRL:
Only the true Messiah denies His divinity.
http://web.archive.org/web/20071002103358/http://www.mwscomp...
My first job out of college I worked for a man that had left the world of mainframes for the then-new world of the IBM PC. His reasoning was: "It's such a small box. It shouldn't be hard to know everything there is to know about it."
2 years later, he realized just how wrong he was.
With the truly stupendous number of potential things to know about today, not knowing something is the far-more-common case. And there shouldn't be any shame in not having heard about something.
2 years later, he realized just how wrong he was.
With the truly stupendous number of potential things to know about today, not knowing something is the far-more-common case. And there shouldn't be any shame in not having heard about something.
Actually the original IBM PC (5150/5160) was simple when compared to a big iron systems of the day
I recall we had the full IBM hardware and software guides for our IBM PC and they where a couple of small A5 binders.
I recall we had the full IBM hardware and software guides for our IBM PC and they where a couple of small A5 binders.
One of the best pieces of wisdom I have received that relates to the IT industry hugely is "no matter who you are talking to and how experienced they are, there is always something that you know that they don't and vice versa".
Great article. I'm a big fan of admitting I'm not familiar with something!
It's scary - but it's so much better than actually knowing something and having your expertise dismissed because you've already blown your credibility.
Looked at another way, I suppose my readiness to admit I don't know things is slightly egotistical: when I say I know something well, I want motherf----- to believe me.
Being up front about what you don't know well is kind of the price you have to pay... well, that and actually knowing stuff in other areas.
It's scary - but it's so much better than actually knowing something and having your expertise dismissed because you've already blown your credibility.
Looked at another way, I suppose my readiness to admit I don't know things is slightly egotistical: when I say I know something well, I want motherf----- to believe me.
Being up front about what you don't know well is kind of the price you have to pay... well, that and actually knowing stuff in other areas.
Admitting ignorance often may be a good pragmatic practice when you are trying to get something specific done where that knowledge is important but it's not necessarily great for your career.
I have met numerous people in my career who seem incredibly impressive when you first meet them, like they are so smart and know something about everything but if you try and pin them down on specifics you realize that they are mostly full of hot air and are just parroting something they heard somebody else say. These people can often get promoted fast, assuming that they can do it convincingly because for every person that called their bluff they left that sparkling first impression on 50 more.
I wonder if it's that they are so good at BS that they have convinced the organization that they really are an expert or whether the organization actually values people who can convincingly BS for more senior positions? If you are in a position negotiating a large contract for example, it's definitely a good thing to look like you know what you are talking about.
In many , many cases you can get away with this BS because the issue itself might not actually be very important. If you can say "uh huh yes, I am familiar with framework X" and the conversation moves on to something else because it was never really about framework X in the first place, admitting ignorance may not be the best strategy.
I have met numerous people in my career who seem incredibly impressive when you first meet them, like they are so smart and know something about everything but if you try and pin them down on specifics you realize that they are mostly full of hot air and are just parroting something they heard somebody else say. These people can often get promoted fast, assuming that they can do it convincingly because for every person that called their bluff they left that sparkling first impression on 50 more.
I wonder if it's that they are so good at BS that they have convinced the organization that they really are an expert or whether the organization actually values people who can convincingly BS for more senior positions? If you are in a position negotiating a large contract for example, it's definitely a good thing to look like you know what you are talking about.
In many , many cases you can get away with this BS because the issue itself might not actually be very important. If you can say "uh huh yes, I am familiar with framework X" and the conversation moves on to something else because it was never really about framework X in the first place, admitting ignorance may not be the best strategy.
I had a guy like that working for me after I was given a team of 16 network designers and engineers to manage. The guy in question was leading a team of 4 network engineers. A couple of the engineers came into my office and complained that this team leader did not actually appear to know anything about network design. I contacted HR and asked for his hiring resume and also wanted to know who interviewed him. Four of the five interviewers were still with the company and all 5 were non-technical people. Alarm bells. I read the resume and it was all kind of vague. I brought him into my office and gave him a kind of technical interview. He was evasive and vague about things. If he had been a jobseeker I would have sent him a polite letter saying no. But he had been on payroll for over a year, was widely considered to be a technical rockstar, and made 20k pounds more than me. One thing that this guy claimed was a CCIE. I checked with Cisco and they had no record of the guy.
I went to my boss, and laid out what I knew. He mentioned that the guy had already been to him complaining about me. I pointed out that the guy had ordered the new style company business cards and put CCIE on it. This means that he was defrauding our customers when he handed out the cards. I explained that every CCIE has a CCIE number and that if he gave us a number, we could check it with Cisco. My boss said that because it was now a sensitive HR situation he wanted to handle it. He advised me to go out for a long lunch that day.
When I got back, the guy's desk had been cleared which was very unusual because in the UK people normally work out their notice period, even if they take a job with a competitor or are laid off. My boss called me in at the end of the day, and thanked me for my investigation and then said that he managed to convince HR to raise my salary by 20k pounds.
Working in large corporate environments in more than one country, I have seen this kind of thing again and again. One particular case was the CEO in New York of a multinational technical company that I had joined. He only lasted two years though because the company was spending too fast.
Now I am always suspicious of people who are considered rockstars or geniuses. If they were really so smart then maybe they would apply that intelligence to sweeping stuff under the rug and pulling the wool over management's eyes, like a certain operations manager at a multinational Internet SaaS company that I once worked at. Technically he was pure incompetence but he managed to hide it for several years by staying online 24x7 and hacking his way around issues in secret until he literally went nuts and collapsed due to lack of sleep and 24x7 stress.
I went to my boss, and laid out what I knew. He mentioned that the guy had already been to him complaining about me. I pointed out that the guy had ordered the new style company business cards and put CCIE on it. This means that he was defrauding our customers when he handed out the cards. I explained that every CCIE has a CCIE number and that if he gave us a number, we could check it with Cisco. My boss said that because it was now a sensitive HR situation he wanted to handle it. He advised me to go out for a long lunch that day.
When I got back, the guy's desk had been cleared which was very unusual because in the UK people normally work out their notice period, even if they take a job with a competitor or are laid off. My boss called me in at the end of the day, and thanked me for my investigation and then said that he managed to convince HR to raise my salary by 20k pounds.
Working in large corporate environments in more than one country, I have seen this kind of thing again and again. One particular case was the CEO in New York of a multinational technical company that I had joined. He only lasted two years though because the company was spending too fast.
Now I am always suspicious of people who are considered rockstars or geniuses. If they were really so smart then maybe they would apply that intelligence to sweeping stuff under the rug and pulling the wool over management's eyes, like a certain operations manager at a multinational Internet SaaS company that I once worked at. Technically he was pure incompetence but he managed to hide it for several years by staying online 24x7 and hacking his way around issues in secret until he literally went nuts and collapsed due to lack of sleep and 24x7 stress.
Being a part of a company like a tech startup is an exercise in knowledge sharing. I know I learned this lesson when I did an internship. For the first 3 months imposter syndrome hit me hard and I wanted desperately to prove myself as a good developer, not to admit any spotty parts of my knowledge for fear of looking stupid. And then, like the article states, quickly googling it in my own time. It started seeping into my work - when I hit a problem I couldn't solve, I'd spend days of time googling and trying things through trial and error when I had the best resource all around me: the other developers who'd seen this stuff 100 times before.
My manager at the time noticed this behaviour after a while and basically told me that the whole point of the internship is to learn, and no one would be surprised or disappointed if I didn't know some minutae about the field I was working in. In fact, most people enjoy sharing their knowledge, it makes them feel smart and useful.
This doesn't just apply on an internship - you might have been hired into a company as a respected, talented programmer, but the situation is still the same - you're there to share your knowledge with others, and be shared with in return, and use that cumulative knowledge to build a product.
Once you've 'looked stupid' once by asking a question, you'll quickly realise it's not so painful after all - and it saves the company a lot of time if you go 'actually, I've not heard of that', and it takes your colleague 5 minutes to explain, than having to Google for info and decipher Wikipedia articles and arcane documentation every time.
My manager at the time noticed this behaviour after a while and basically told me that the whole point of the internship is to learn, and no one would be surprised or disappointed if I didn't know some minutae about the field I was working in. In fact, most people enjoy sharing their knowledge, it makes them feel smart and useful.
This doesn't just apply on an internship - you might have been hired into a company as a respected, talented programmer, but the situation is still the same - you're there to share your knowledge with others, and be shared with in return, and use that cumulative knowledge to build a product.
Once you've 'looked stupid' once by asking a question, you'll quickly realise it's not so painful after all - and it saves the company a lot of time if you go 'actually, I've not heard of that', and it takes your colleague 5 minutes to explain, than having to Google for info and decipher Wikipedia articles and arcane documentation every time.
Good post. It's a developer-specific flavor of Imposter Syndrome that I've struggled with too. Must learn all the frameworks! Now! And my designer side wants to master ever style I see on Dribbble until Photoshop stands up and starts clapping.
A book that helped me overcome it is called Mindset, written by the psychology researcher Carol Dweck. I can't recommend it highly enough. Apparently the problem gets worse as you gain skills, not better, if you don't consciously take steps to counter it.
I was just chatting with a friend this weekend that I also recommended the book to because he identified Imposter Syndrone as his major obstacle in life, even though he's highly accomplished and his blog is constantly on HN. Talking to him made me realize that it not only affects more people than I realize but that it probably also affects generalists more than specialists, since being T-shaped means by definition that you can only pick a few areas to go deep.
A book that helped me overcome it is called Mindset, written by the psychology researcher Carol Dweck. I can't recommend it highly enough. Apparently the problem gets worse as you gain skills, not better, if you don't consciously take steps to counter it.
I was just chatting with a friend this weekend that I also recommended the book to because he identified Imposter Syndrone as his major obstacle in life, even though he's highly accomplished and his blog is constantly on HN. Talking to him made me realize that it not only affects more people than I realize but that it probably also affects generalists more than specialists, since being T-shaped means by definition that you can only pick a few areas to go deep.
Good old Impostor Syndrome.
Sometimes, I feel as if I have no idea what I am doing. I mean, I only know Photoshop, Illustrator, HTML, CSS, JavaScript and PHP. I can only design websites, program them and launch them. I am such a fraud. I can't even use .NET or Ruby! How can I call myself a web developer? And I keep using google to find answers or keywords I forget! If I wasn't such a fraud, I could write code on paper, and it would be perfect!
Sometimes, I feel as if I have no idea what I am doing. I mean, I only know Photoshop, Illustrator, HTML, CSS, JavaScript and PHP. I can only design websites, program them and launch them. I am such a fraud. I can't even use .NET or Ruby! How can I call myself a web developer? And I keep using google to find answers or keywords I forget! If I wasn't such a fraud, I could write code on paper, and it would be perfect!
I think this is a measure of confidence and maturity.
If you are confident enough, mature enough in yourself and work in an atmosphere that's mature enough not to criticise for it, saying "nope, that's new to me, is it something I should learn/look up?" is a good thing.
If you are confident enough, mature enough in yourself and work in an atmosphere that's mature enough not to criticise for it, saying "nope, that's new to me, is it something I should learn/look up?" is a good thing.
This reminds me of an issue I had with a coworker. Personally, I'm reluctant to answer questions about the behaviors of a codebase I work on (e.g. "what kinds of input can you give in field X of dialog Y?") without reviewing the code first. There are far too many combinatorial logical possibilities, not to mention the fact that a mature codebase becomes so fractured and diverse that nobody really knows what's going on at any given code location.
Meanwhile, my coworker would confidently answer with whatever he thought was correct. He would often be close, but he would also, alarmingly often, be completely wrong, to the point of describing behavior that had nothing to do with the product in question.
As luck would have it, none of his lies/misrepresentations ever mattered. Whatever prompted the questions ended up being unimportant, or the support issue was resolved through other means. He ended up promoted to manager, at which point the department imploded on itself under his watch. To my knowledge, he never had any idea how incorrect he was, since he was simply wildly confident in himself.
Meanwhile, my coworker would confidently answer with whatever he thought was correct. He would often be close, but he would also, alarmingly often, be completely wrong, to the point of describing behavior that had nothing to do with the product in question.
As luck would have it, none of his lies/misrepresentations ever mattered. Whatever prompted the questions ended up being unimportant, or the support issue was resolved through other means. He ended up promoted to manager, at which point the department imploded on itself under his watch. To my knowledge, he never had any idea how incorrect he was, since he was simply wildly confident in himself.
Owning up to posturing
I think it's good advice to be aware of doing this but you can go too far in compensating. Don't derail other people's speech by riddling them with questions or admissions, but if they ask you if you know be honest.
In other terms, nodding to a speaker can mean "please continue", I think it rarely actually means "I understand completely".
I think it's good advice to be aware of doing this but you can go too far in compensating. Don't derail other people's speech by riddling them with questions or admissions, but if they ask you if you know be honest.
In other terms, nodding to a speaker can mean "please continue", I think it rarely actually means "I understand completely".
I say it all the time; it gives folks the chance to show off, educate all of us. Its a conversational ploy that's useful even when you DO know.
Pointless to argue sex bias; who cares? It happens all the time that we feel our ignorance is on display. I revel in it, ask questions, find out if the other guy really knows what they're talking about.
Pointless to argue sex bias; who cares? It happens all the time that we feel our ignorance is on display. I revel in it, ask questions, find out if the other guy really knows what they're talking about.
Question about phrasing:
"This is the first time I've heard of that" sounds better to me than saying "I've never heard of that before". It feels more like I'm grateful to the person who has introduced me to the topic rather than dismissive of this thing they may have just made up.
Great point here:
"I go through periods of self-doubt about my qualifications as a web developer. I have a sense I’m not alone in this. Our field is by nature a generalists’ field, where expertise involves synthesis of concepts and technologies, not complete mastery of a single, static topic. It’s hard to know how to tell if you’re good at your job."
I'd say, I'd agree fully but you can look at it as an advantageous position, in my opinion.
The ability to bend a lot of different concepts/technologies that were put together by experts into something that solves the problem puts you in an important place.
I'd say show love for the open source community and the people who know everything about a particular framework or technology, but really it comes down to asking, "No, not familiar, what are the advantages of this [new thing] over what we've been doing?"
"I go through periods of self-doubt about my qualifications as a web developer. I have a sense I’m not alone in this. Our field is by nature a generalists’ field, where expertise involves synthesis of concepts and technologies, not complete mastery of a single, static topic. It’s hard to know how to tell if you’re good at your job."
I'd say, I'd agree fully but you can look at it as an advantageous position, in my opinion.
The ability to bend a lot of different concepts/technologies that were put together by experts into something that solves the problem puts you in an important place.
I'd say show love for the open source community and the people who know everything about a particular framework or technology, but really it comes down to asking, "No, not familiar, what are the advantages of this [new thing] over what we've been doing?"
I generally enjoy admitting ignorance and asking questions that seem dumb as a way of educating myself. You do have to be mindful of who you do this with. The person you're speaking with has to have a certain level of maturity themselves in order to not consider you stupid for your admission of ignorance.
In an ideal situation, you're speaking with someone who will allow you to probe them on the subject with a series of "stupid" (sounding) questions till you have a good basic understanding of the topic.
Unfortunately, many people are not like that. They will simply think that you're stupid and move on to the next topic. Sometimes these may be people you want to make a good impression on, for a variety of reasons, so some diplomacy is required.
In an ideal situation, you're speaking with someone who will allow you to probe them on the subject with a series of "stupid" (sounding) questions till you have a good basic understanding of the topic.
Unfortunately, many people are not like that. They will simply think that you're stupid and move on to the next topic. Sometimes these may be people you want to make a good impression on, for a variety of reasons, so some diplomacy is required.
I can think of at least two employers who gave me the job because of my honesty when admitting to my ignorance of certain job-related knowledge during an interview. It's a really great trait for recent graduates, many of whom will nod along and say, "Oh yeah, I've used such-and-such before." My first two jobs out of college the boss told me after giving me the gig that a big part of me getting hired was that I didn't appear to be over-stating about my abilities and it was clear what they were getting by hiring me. So if anything, young developers should just remember to be honest and that you can't be expected to know everything right off the bat. Employers will appreciate the honesty.
I think this definitely comes with experience, and therefore confidence. I own up to not knowing things all the time, but I doubt I would've four or five years ago. It just becomes easier when you're confident in what it is you do know.
There are too many topics to be an expert on everything. I've found that honesty leads to better conversations and higher trust long-term relationships.
"That's not really my area of expertise, what do you mean by that?"
"I haven't looked into that much yet"
"I'm sorry, I don't know that word"
"I've been meaning to look into ____, can you give me the 5 second overview"
I can separate the world easily into two types of people: those who will asks questions if they don't understand, and people I'm unlikely to trust.
"That's not really my area of expertise, what do you mean by that?"
"I haven't looked into that much yet"
"I'm sorry, I don't know that word"
"I've been meaning to look into ____, can you give me the 5 second overview"
I can separate the world easily into two types of people: those who will asks questions if they don't understand, and people I'm unlikely to trust.
There is a new significant technology released every week. Sometimes there are several in one day. When people seem surprised that I haven't heard of their new favorite tech it makes them seem inexperienced or dumb to me. Actually I think you can almost take any two random developers and there is a good chance they are each working on technologies that the other has never heard of. The thing is new technology comes out as soon as people think of it and type it in.
This is the right attitude to have about learning stuff related to your field. But, I think it is very important to really know your field very well if you want to be good at it. It may be really obvious but I had to write it[1].
[1] - http://serenecode.org/2013/11/proper-education-is-a-must/
[1] - http://serenecode.org/2013/11/proper-education-is-a-must/
I had a discussion with some coworkers while I was an intern (not all that many years ago) about IPX (Internetwork Packet Exchange). I had to admit I didn't know the protocol. There was an immediate and severe negative reaction from everyone in the room, upset that I didn't know IPX, upset that I never learned it, upset that I apparently hadn't been paying attention in class the day that was taught. Problem is, it never was taught, and of all the protocols I did take the time to learn, I learned the ones I was likely to run into most often in life. IPX isn't commonly used, and it certainly wasn't taught at my school.
That's the reason it's hard for some people to admit they don't know: because no matter what, there's this fear that everyone expects you should know it already. No matter how obscure. It's really easy to brush it off the first time something new comes up, or the second or third time. By then, it's embarrassing to admit you have no idea what they're talking about.
That's the reason it's hard for some people to admit they don't know: because no matter what, there's this fear that everyone expects you should know it already. No matter how obscure. It's really easy to brush it off the first time something new comes up, or the second or third time. By then, it's embarrassing to admit you have no idea what they're talking about.
I didn't think IPX/SPX was used anymore. I sure wouldn't expect an intern to know anything about IPX/SPX outside of maybe its existence.
When I was in neurology, my favourite sales rep was the guy who would answer a question with "I'm not sure. I'll find out and get back to you". He didn't always get back, but he usually did, and you were better off for it. Much better than the sales reps who gave you a bit of hot air masking that they didn't know the answer.
This is a common cognitive bias, overestimating familiarity with expert domains. Sometimes called the curse of knowledge, or the terminology illusion (specific to overestimating familiarity with jargon).
Unfortunately, it happens naturally and automatically, and is thus very difficult to overcome.
Unfortunately, it happens naturally and automatically, and is thus very difficult to overcome.
I find myself doing this as well. But often it is with people that just won't shut up with their technical mambo-jambo of how great something-something is. Asking questions would just make them talk for even longer, so I shut up, nod and am on my way as quick as possible.
Great point. Not only is it personally empowering to be open with what you don't know, there are frequently 4 or 5 other people who are happy when you ask for clarification.
When I'm on sales calls, I now go out of my way to ask those questions of my own people.
When I'm on sales calls, I now go out of my way to ask those questions of my own people.
Here's one thing I've learned about knowledge/implementation of technology:
I've gained a lot of trust from clients for being knowledgeable in the field of emerging tech. I've earned a lot of money by actually using it to provide solutions.
I've gained a lot of trust from clients for being knowledgeable in the field of emerging tech. I've earned a lot of money by actually using it to provide solutions.
This post hit a lot of nails right on the head, for me at least (I even played midfield).
Why is the top of your heading A List Apart hidden behind your translucent navigation bar at the top.
.killer-logo { margin-top:55px;} That might do the trick.
Edit: 42px would be best as your logo is cut off at the top of the letters.
.killer-logo { margin-top:55px;} That might do the trick.
Edit: 42px would be best as your logo is cut off at the top of the letters.
It's a design choice. I get why they did it, but it really bothers my eyes ... something about almost being able to read something make my visual system go haywire.
The real source of the issue is the nav bar itself, regardless of which element follows it. Absolute positioning doesn't push subsequent elements down, but it does allow you to use z-index. Earlier today I made a demo of one possible way to get "the best of both worlds": http://cdpn.io/wyuBg
Like a fellow commenter said, this may be a deliberate design choice, so the point could be moot.
Like a fellow commenter said, this may be a deliberate design choice, so the point could be moot.
I feel terrible because while I can relate perfectly to the author's fears, I'm finding I envy her ability to write so well.
This is completely off-topic, but Lyza Danger Gardner is a pretty badass name.
A simple rule I go by: This brain is for processing. Not storing.
"Just-in-time googling". That made my day, thank you!
This is what I was looking for. Perfect way to phrase it.
[deleted]
If someone at the start of their career asked me about having this problem now I'd instinctively tell her or him that it's not worth working with the people you find yourself being dishonest around. But how do you find the good people? It's hard, and it's when you are least experienced that you will have the most trouble differentiating between the knowledgeable and the hangers on.
This is a huge huge problem in our industry. And I think a lot of it stems from the fact that 3 years ago when I knew nothing but the HTML & CSS I picked up on hobby projects and a couple college CS classes, what was I? I was a web developer. What am I now after 3 years of real projects, working with devs that know far more than I do, reading a ton, going to talks, and taking on increasingly more responsibility on projects? I'm still a web developer. In that context it's very challenging to be the person who is new to the field because everyone wants you to be the expert, and can be mean when you're not.