"The Hard Parts of Open Source" by Evan Czaplicki
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ก.ค. 2024
- As more people enter /r/elm and the Elm discourse, I have thought a lot about how "online communities" work. Patterns of conflict. Why those patterns exist. Structures that would diffuse that conflict in healthy ways. Initially I just wanted to get yelled at less, but I instead stumbled upon "a cultural history of open source" that may reveal a path to more civil and productive online communication in general.
Attendees will leave with (1) an inside perspective on open source projects, (2) a historical and cultural framework that I think can improve online communities right now, and (3) some interesting references and ideas to explore further in their own projects and interactions.
Speaker: Evan Czaplicki - วิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี
Every time I watch this video, I see something new. Evan, I wish I were as insightful as you.
Came expecting a great talk on Elm, instead got an amazing talk on huge problems in open source and society at large. Evan is the best!
Intent: Praise
Background: Software engineer. Long-time fan of Evan's talks; tinkered with elm but don't actually use it.
What I like about him is that he sees everything not only through a practical lens but also philosophical and spiritual. He thinks about the grand picture and has a vision for the experience and state of mind his language should force others into and from my perspective that's a good thing! If I code in Elm I notice how my head becomes actually clearer. It disciplines my thinking and calms my mind. I hope Elm will become backed by a big company one day 🙏🏼
I found this deeply touching, benevolent and helpful for the future of open source (that's what my thumbs up is supposed to say...)
I agree with this comment (that's what my thumbs up is supposed to say...)
@@mthankutluI agree with this reply (that's what my thumbs up is supposed to say...)
Wow really good presentation. I hope this goes #viral :)
I gathered some of the citations at gist.github.com/evancz/b29d1ce4166a557d03474278b2b44514
And the presentation is available at prezi.com/oowcpzsnwp-8/the-hard-parts-of-open-source/
I think I should turn certain parts of this talk into stand-alone blog posts, but I have not done it as of the release of the talk.
I think this was my favorite talk of the conference!
It's one of the talks that seriously impacts my reading list.
One of the best talks in general! This should be on TED! I revisit once a year or so just for the human/societal bits!
@@eZU4nQsWN9pAGsU38aHj consider watching his recent presentation related to " Economics of Programming Languages "
Amazing talk. Very powerful.
"there is very powerful incentives for our interactions to go really poorly, and i don't think the intellectual history of freedom is really well setup to protect against that... freedom does not help you escape from choice architectures. design of other choice architectures is a way to deal with that." every time i listen to this talk, i hear something new and insightful."
This one was one of the best talks I've seen about open source communities. Thought provoking. Thank you!
When I finished watching this I clicked 'Like', then realized what I had done.
Well, under the current implementation more likes help a video get more attention by the YT algorithm, so you could argue it is still a net plus until that system changes.
This is spectacular, well done! Thank you for sharing.
Excellent talk. It gave me several new perspectives on community and open source. Thank you.
If I can add another reference: "A Group Is Its Own Worst Enemy" by Clay Shirky. Short transcript of a talk from 2003, freely available on his website.
Like many of his stuff it features great insights on how internet communities grow, change and are likely to self-destruct over time. Different angle than Evan's here, complementary in a way I guess, as it is about how communities spontaneously create structures and how the software used for communication may or may not support that.
Fantastic talk!
That was an outstanding presentation, very interesting and great performance!
Evan is so nice that the meanest thing he thinks a person might do is "throw a bicycle on the ground." :)
Incredibly cathartic to listen to this.
What a great talk! Thank you very much!!
Deeply insightful and beautifully presented.
Loved this talk!
This is fantastically brilliant
Great talk!
Wow. Just wow.
Add this good stuff to my Favourites so that I can share it with people to explain the design of social media, wow.
Great presentation.
This guy is a genius!
What if, wrt to intentional communication, the INTENT option didn't necessarily limit the fields available to anyone responding but rather simply set the default fields. So if you're responding to a post with the INTENT attribute set to "ask" then maybe the default fields would be RESTATE-QUESTION and ANSWER or CLARIFY. But if you wanted to not use those fields or use other fields like RESPOND or CRITICIZE or OFFER-ALTERNATIVE, you have the option to. So it's more like nudging the choice architecture instead of simply setting it
I think that inherent to the idea of the different communication options is to promote positive word usage versus more nagative sounding words to direct the communications to be taken more positively overall.
For example, there are people who hear the word criticism think it means something negative even though criticisms can be constructive. To help prevent the communication from being taken incorrectly and having negative associations that the author did not intend, the choice of words used for communication intent has to be carefully considered.
I got a lot out of this talk. Thank you.
I especially wanted to point out the fantastic informational design of the slides.
A transcript of this talk is available here: github.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/blob/master/Czaplicki_Evan/TheHardPartsOfOpenSource.md
Very clever talk.
So the idea is that to resist hierarchy we don't just need to abolish it but we need to create the alternatives
Wow this was the most insightful thing I've seen over the last few months, this and RTFeldman. Our community is wonderful :)
Is 'Would it be easier to...' a coded 'why don't you just...' I'm thinking no, but a longer answer would inspire.
The depiction of the evolution of text ads might be glossing over the false paths and dead ends that took years to prune.
Interesting to see discussion about the pros and cons of 'user definable infix operators, when APL was born with them, and one might have a 'What's water?' moment.
Anyone have the list of books?
Intent: Praise
Background: Internet hacker for 30 years
4:08 2018 Evan showed why his community is so nice and why Elm will outlast him.
This nonlinear slideshow, I have seen it before. Are there essays/articles talking about good ways to use this medium?
Was this presentation made with Elm? It's very pleasant to watch.
Shout out to Adam Curtis at 14min!
excellent, thank you very much. Had to type out these nuggets (38:38):
'there's a big conflict here where there's very powerful incentives for our interactions to go really poorly and I don't think the intellectual history of freedom really is well set up to protect against that'
'in a choice architecture that predictably alters people's behavior; yeah you were given a free choice but happen to choose a different thing 30% of the time'
On a similar empathetic note, python core contributor Brett Cannon's 'call for kindness in open source' @changelog podcast last month: changelog.com/news/a-call-for-kindness-in-open-source-b0L7
'Enough people have told me Elm is going to die next month.' APLer says #HoldMyBeer, has Elm been called a 'write-only language?'
Wow - great talk. I had NO IDEA this was going to go through cybernetics and the whole earth catalogue. Werner was a nut, wasn't he!? ... But he was right. His personality soured the study, though (read: he was a major asshole), and cybernetics died with him.
User-definable infix operators are nice. No one forces you to use them and used in the right way, can make for some greate DSLs. Teams should have a style guide.
Many people use libraries though so such a style guide can't really be enforced everywhere. I agree infix operators can let you do really clever things though! See Python's pathlib.
I'm a fan of the decision to remove them - I can now confidently march into any good Elm codebase and know what's going on simply by reading function names. To me, that beats any "flexibility" to be able to define or >=-~> or ^_^