Home
Creators
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register Favorites Keys Review DMs Logout
Community
Telegram ThePornDude
Home Creators Posts Import Register Favorites Logout

Life In Code: Programming For The Millions (Patreon)

Published:
2024-09-21 18:20:24
Imported:
2026-06
Tags:

Content

I straight up completely actually didn't notice it was Friday yesterday so instead of doing book club I just made art / edited vid /saw friends / saw some local live music

also saw jpegmafia at Rebel in Toronto Thursday it was intense

my city going apeshit for Jesus Forgive Me I Am A Thot. Didn't realize how beloved peggy is.

//////

anyways I loved this chapter!!! Super cumulative, kind of a big form break to suddenly casually reference previous events from Ullman's life, but an effective one that makes you feel the totality of the tale. You get a sense throughout this chapter that making coding literacy widely accessible is a deeply held personal passion, and is something she's willing to leverage her entire wealth of life experience to cultivate in others.

The Illusion of Objectivity:

Biggest point of agreement between Ullman and Lanier, I'd say.

My thought is that we open the door to the coding rooms, spread widely the knowledge of what happens inside. It doesn't matter to what degree an individual learns to code; that knowledge does not need to lead to professional programming. The goal is for the general population to pierce the computing veil; to demystify algorithms; to know that code has biases, that programs are written by human beings and can be changed by human beings; to know the concepts, the patterns of thinking, the paths through which human thoughts get altered as they pass into the language of computers. (p. 246)

Far from muting the social context, the internet is an amplifier. It broadcasts its value-laden messages around the world. (p. 265)

Although I don't necessarily share Ullman's passion for coding (as in I will not be the one to spearhead coding club; perhaps i am a part time attendee) I do find I share her passion for embodied human experience, for the revelation of flesh and emotion inside of our machines, and for in her words: "a renewed belief in the value of the public sphere and civic life." (p. 248)

.

One thing that I think is extremely endearing and engendering of admiration for the qualitative nature of Ullman's mind is when she so simply includes her evaluations of what is said in these tech courses.

Warren offers the best encouragement, I think, when he says, "Beginning does not mean easy." (p. 252)

It reminds me of in the Y2K chapter when she expresses her favourite solution was to just lie to the computer and set the clocks back to 1972 so they had more time to update the code.

Two Music Industry Analogies:

The way Ullman talks about coding culture reminds me a bit of jazz culture and music producer culture. Same sorts of silent purity tests, invisible forcefields, crass boyish humour.

The entryway was clogged with barriers from the very start: The Big Bang Theory, RPLSL, "I want a shrubbery," in-jokes, Sheldon and Spock and U.S. television programs. And then, all through the course, the underlying assumption of male, white, geeky American culture. The crucial question, the answer to which determines how easily one crosses into the programming room—indeed, into any room—is this: Do you feel invited in? (p. 254)

Add on top of this the likelihood of peers and potential mentors in audio engineering to seek sex from you, i've seen this kind of blunt blind accidental cultural wall winnow out would-be female practitioners. Then: "I think women just aren't as into jazz and engineering."

Second unrelated point, I find this sentence to be exactly true in getting good at music:

Power lies in the refusal to be intimidated: in technical fearlessness. (p. 271)

,

Two Beautiful Single Thoughts:

I could not have said anything like this twenty-two years ago. Over time, though, my memories have become more rounded. (p. 255)

My birthday is coming up right at the end of this month, and I am feeling the late twenties. The Vampire Weekend album and Frances Ha both really revel in this theme of growing up, celebrating a more humble existence, finding peace and love with your place in the universe. Had a lovely catchup with a very intimate friend from highschool recently. He's moved out of the city, bought a house, got a job with benefits, engaged, sober-ish, just adoring the experience of peaceful fulsome domestic life with the one he loves. I feel the pull.

///

And finally I fucking love this line:

...it is discouraging, dispiriting, when nothing is expected of you. "Nothing": it stings. (p. 260)

................

_________

things and stuff below

Files

Comments

Xaris _

First time officially participating in the book club this round lol 🙌 I really loved the encouragement of learning to code. I often think about how I have an interest in coding but like, idk it seems like a far away thing. I think about the Livestream she saw where the guy completely disrespects his female co-host in front of everybody, and how she said this in itself is a learning opportunity... A learning opportunity to mentally prepare and practice for the road blocks that exist. The prejudice and disrespect. I hope I can think of it that way, that I can *practice* resilience. That it's not something I may be born with, but I can and will learn to withstand people's bad attitudes. Idk, I'm very very dependent on positive reinforcement, I worry I'll quit at the first sign of someone rolling their eyes at me. Idk, it's sad but encouraging to hear her anger.

SkateLouis

This book has absolutely grown on me. When every tale feels so connected, it is beautiful really. Her passion for expanding the coding world kind of rubbed on me ngl... I have a lot of thoughts, but I feel like I need more time to process them because I'm living the current computer science university experience and the strings of letters and numbers are getting the best of me (I'll be ready when the book report comes hopefully)

yennik arual

will come back for Life In Code comments but imagine going to a peggy concert and seeing cj the x there. peak musically inclined dirtbag leftist's wet dream . glad you enjoyed it and i'm guessing the new album too. :D

sepha

It’s crazy how all the chapters about programming itself are so…relatable. Like the thing about finding the bug in the inventory system and how it became mythologized in Ullman’s brain as a beautiful, teasing woman. Relatable. How programmers type via quotes and how it all feels very unsexy. THEY STILL DO THAT AND I HATE IT 😭. How the courses “for everyone” don’t actually tell you how you’re doing because the autograder sucks. The culture of technology and attitude of others as we try to learn how to code and change the philosophical paradigms of the tech world. I’ve had firsthand experience with that well-meaning but oftentimes alienating geekiness. It’s odd how little work I have to do to imagine any of these scenarios because they literally just…happened to me in real life. It’s also odd that this is the FIRST time I’ve heard anyone speak about programming and tech culture and how it affects interpersonal relationships this way. I did my undergrad in computer science; shouldn’t this viewpoint have been more common???? But getting someone at my school to talk about this was like pulling teeth. I saw an Instagram reel recently in which a woman programmer made an offhand remark about “programmers talking about the least important thing in the world.” Real. That is the sickness of tech culture…and it’s bastardizing the real beauty of computer science. Tech culture has done many things to make programming seem alienating. It’s perverted the study into something so…insipid. Startups that go nowhere. AI that spits out facts with 90% accuracy, and a culture that would rather use that than learn something beautiful and true, or have a shred of fucking discipline. “Shit in, shit out,” my father says of most tech jobs. (This is kind of off topic, but something similar happened in math education. More can be found here [https://worrydream.com/refs/Lockhart_2002_-_A_Mathematician%27s_Lament.pdf] and here [https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2014/03/5-year-olds-can-learn-calculus/284124/].) But computer science is more than that!!! Ullman talks about “the beauty that resides in the best algorithms of computer science” and “the wonder of a great algorithm’s logical beauty, its elegance of thought, the sheer intelligence and creativity it reflects.” “A rare blend of creativity and precision.” Yes!!! This is real!!! That’s what it’s about!!! The act of doing programming, not the financial result, is something that is so special to me. One time I wanted to implement my operating systems project without process IDs just because, and that whole process of designing it and getting it to work was so galvanizing for me as a programmer. I still drool a little when I think about it to be honest. Studying computer science—REAL computer science, mind you—has an amazing rush of discovery, similar to studying anything else, like humanities and math and science and the arts. (Not saying the feeling of studying them is the same, though…different flavor.) (Also, I have always maintained that true discovery is a creative process. Sure, someone may have done it before, but it’s the first time YOU have discovered it, so…) I wholeheartedly agree with Ullman’s ideals of bringing computer science to everyone—but it needs a pedagogical shift. The references to media we don’t care about can probably go, and related, the baking metaphor and metaphors in general can probably go as well. In my observations people have always seen computer science as too intimidating to be explained on its own. And so they try to “humanize” it and make it more palatable via references or baking metaphors. But this is a distraction. Not everything is like something else. Programming is not baking; it is programming. Moreover, the act of programming, of that delicate dance of creativity and precision, demands our full attention. The intimidation factor still needs to be addressed, though, and I think it should be done by demystifying the narrative surrounding tech: not through artifice, but through truth. Something like Ullman's Life In Code would work for this.

Chandler Sterling

Imposter Syndrome is one of the most pervasive issues I have seen in recent years. I am constantly surprised to see just how many competent people are internally screaming at all times (just like me!!). Ellen Ullman has hinted at the fact that she felt like an imposter in other essays, but now that she is explaining the path she took to become a software engineer, it is clear that it is a road paved with insecurity and uncertainty for everyone. "Beginning does not mean easy." (pg. 252 [Joe Warren encouraging new Python students]) I think the biggest problem that people have when they try to teach themselves programming is the isolation. I'm glad to see that Ullman agrees. That's the beauty of the live forums. It creates a community for people in an area that typically begs you to go it alone. It goes toe-to-toe with the idea that the computer is a tool for the individual. My PC, but Our Forum. In that vein, I think individualism is at the center of the problems presented in this chapter. "Private and charter schools are like websites: they can foster any belief, shatter the idea that there is anything called truth, can blur the distinction between reality and belief." (pg. 248) The Internet and it's I-It framing are the basis for so much modern Individualism. Interact with avatars, not people. Create your very own avatar: an online persona that will separate your unique self from everyone else. The irony is that all of this is developed to help advertisers drop you in a bucket while convincing you that it is tailored to you specifically. They are using machine learning to create communities, and then doing everything in their power to hide that fact from you so you feel like you're getting individualized treatment. It's easy to blame the libertarians who pioneered the Internet for this problem, but even early computer science had a community. Like Ullman said, some of the oldest, most useful algorithms were the result of, "A cumulative effort, a collaboration over time." (pg. 262) There is still the seed of relationships between people at the heart of the code. We can still tear up the floorboards to find that foundation waiting for us underneath. I think this is at the core of Ullman's desire to spread programming to the world. If we all understood it, we wouldn't fall for the myth of the tech billionaire and the idea that we have entered the age of the Individual. Somewhere along the line, we all need the forum. Somewhere we can go to connect with others and remind ourselves that we aren't alone in this. A good class that conveys this is vital to teaching the world that the machine isn't magic. It's just another feat of humans working together. I'm glad to see that Ullman was able to reclaim some sense of self from the Imposter Syndrome. "Then I got into the deeper reaches of programming: operating systems, human-computer interfaces. I did have pretty hair; I went on to become a software engineer." (pg. 242) I cannot get over that line, "I did have pretty hair;" it just fills me with so much glee. Such an embodied, human moment in the midst of abstract machines. I think that small things like this are so important when you work with computers all the time. Grounding yourself in your body and appreciating it reminds us that there is something Good about being human. Something that the machine continues to lack. This chapter finally helped me understand (or at least put into words) the major difference between Ullman's and Lanier's perspectives. "The role they assigned to me, translator, is perhaps the most accurate description of everything I have done concerning technology." (pg. 242) Lanier was not interested in translation. He expected anyone who picked up YANAG to be immersed in the technology he talked about. In many ways, he was subject to the same biases that Ullman was decrying with the programming courses. He stood in the doorway even as he attempted to tear down the walls. Ullman opens whatever doors and windows she can find. You may not care to pass through, but you can see a far clearer picture of what exists on the other side. I have had a pet theory for several years now that translators are all we ever are. Every conversation is an attempt to translate thoughts into words. Every song is a translation into notes. Translation is the process of shaping our inner worlds into something which can be parsed by the world outside of us. It is through doing this that we can see the world around us is real. I think, therefore I am? Bullshit. We speak, therefore you are. I'm pretty sure if everything around me was just a projection of my mind, there would be far fewer misunderstandings, but that's just me. :/ High Quality translations are great art, effective communication, and deeper understanding of others. Low Quality translations are shallow art, miscommunication, and a lack of curiosity in the world around you. Ellen Ullman is a great translator. She writes essays which translate the tech world into bite-sized vignettes. You never have to work a day as a programmer to understand her concerns about how email impacted her relationship with Karl. You don't need to have a pet to see how Sadie the Cat was greater than the tricks which made up her robotic counterpart. This ability to translate is another way that humans exceed machines. Sure, they can literally translate between different languages to middling effect, but what makes AI feel so lacking is it's inability to understand anything outside of literal requests and clear-cut rubrics. "'If the code were machine-graded,' Warren says, 'you'd be dead.'" (pg. 253) The machine is a poor translator. It's a black box, something which does not convey its inner-world effectively. We have to do all of the emotional work to understand what's wrong when we hunt for bugs. If my friends were as obtuse as a machine, I would probably stop talking to them. The real Turing test shouldn't be whether we think a machine is human, it should be whether we would consider a machine a good friend. Only then would they be a good translator, and therefore, on level with people (in my mind at least). I found her analysis of the 3 free courses to be really insightful. I can't help but hope she uses what she learned to create her own course. The passion is definitely there, but I know it takes a lot more than that to undertake a project like that. Still, it seems like a natural next step in her quest to open these doors. We need more people like Professor Al Filreis and his poetry class. (of course it was a poet. Go Poetry!!) "He invites the students to come by and visit if they are in the area. They will not find the library doors closed to them." (pg. 267) We have to stop locking the doors behind us. The algorithms were built in community. The forums kept us going when we realized that, "Beginning does not mean easy." Once we get in, we owe it to everyone behind us to make room.

phil e the theyby

Holy shit the PASSION in this chapter! I felt genuine heartbreak in the “Programming for Everyone” section (the last one) in seeing Ullman’s spark of hope light up, and then crash to the ground when seeing the course in practice deviate so far from its stated ideals, and from what she was really longing for. I told myself I’d try to stick closer to the text, but I kind of can’t help myself: this last section of the chapter just made me deeply curious about the systems at play in the development of Severance’s course, and what this can tell us about “movement building” more generally. If I assume that Severance really did mean the things he said in the initial video, what ended up happening? What was demanded of him in terms of structure? Who was going to pay for the servers that would host the communal spaces to allow for this “expanding, open ecosystem” (267) to exist? Did the cost of a Coursera course as expansive as what he had in mind become prohibitive for potential students, leading it to be condensed into four lectures? Who were the people in the meetings who said, “Come on, clearly SOME people can’t understand coding. We’re not going to waste all these resources trying to help people who are beyond help. Let’s create something simple just to weed those people out”? I think there are parallels with Kill the Internet too (as a concept that has “movement elements,” although I feel like CJ would be opposed to calling it a movement). I believe folks here (in the KtI Book Club) share a broad appreciation for embodied human experience and want to encourage more of that to exist in the world, rather than spending so much fucking time on our phones. It exists because we give money to Patreon earmarked to CJ every month, and CJ takes most of that money while Patreon takes a cut. This way, CJ doesn’t have to work a different job (giving more time for creating and curating this space) and is psychologically pressured (by the fact that it’s their job) to maintain the thing they started (which isn’t to say they don’t like it, because I think they do). If Patreon decides it suddenly wants a much larger cut, or if Patreon goes out of business, those conditions may change pretty drastically. If CJ becomes unable to do the thing for any reason, that also changes things drastically or ends them entirely. Anything you try to organize on the Internet is subject to who hosts the servers and what their priorities are. Obviously there’s a lot you can do on Google (which is also a corporation, but one that tends not to limit people using it too much AFAIK), but how do you even meet the people to coordinate things with ON Google? How do you build the trust needed to actually organize something? There’s no such thing as a free internet. If any movement does not serve the goals of the server hosts (which is typically capital, or at least, not EXPENDING capital by virtue of hosting the servers), the movement goes somewhere else, or it dies. The examples I’ve seen that host large free spaces online tend to rely on advertising money, have a person with a lot of wealth who both runs and bankrolls the thing, or a little of both. The ad one in particular will require people are on it enough for the ad offerers to get enough “watch time,” thus fundamentally incentivizing you to keep people online so you’re able to afford the online space. If you want to break free of that, you need to either stay small in what you’re doing (so that there aren’t many server demands) or get offline. This is part of why I want killtheinternet.ca so badly. I don’t know if I see KtI as a “movement” (labeling it that way tends to get folks really fixated on if people are “in the thing” or not, and I dislike that in-group/out-group mindset), but I see it as a really good organizing idea that it helps to have common language around, and I’d love for in-person things to start to exist that lean into this KtI idea, and to start to have some of that dialogue in ways that are less dependent on Patreon or CJ. None of this is a problem with either of them. From what I’ve seen and the Town Hall interactions I’ve had with them, I really like CJ! And as far as online spaces go, I really like Patreon too; I think it’s a fantastic platform, it just unfortunately has to make money for the venture capitalists who initially funded it. I just have this eerie feeling of still feeding the machine whenever I’m here.

Silver

“I considered the two nothings: the nothing expected of the online students, the million dollars that would be nothing to the Stanford students, of whom everything is expected.” (266) Fuck… The description of the poetry professor almost broke my heart, god its such a simple but powerful image. “It can be like those times you hear someone playing the piano beautifully or a sax wailing through jazz improvisations, and the sounds ignite a longing in you, a desire to take up the difficulties, and learn how to play music.” (260) As the musician in this image, i am so thankful for the reminder of how beautiful music is. I am always in the danger of forgetting why i actually do this.

azalea water

It’s sad to only have 30 pages of this book left. ---------------------------------------- I appreciate the way Ullman writes about diversity. Most times when you see adverts for “women in stem!”, or the LGBT society of a large corporation, their sole purpose is to make a company/organisation look good. But Ullman seems to intimately understand that the point of diversity in the tech industry (or any industry for that matter) is to bring new perspectives to the table for the sake of creating better things. “To my hoped-for new programming army: You are society’s best hope for loosening the stranglehold of the code that surrounds us. Enlist compatriots. Upset assumptions. It will take time and perseverance, but you can do it. Stick a needle into the shiny bubble of the technical world’s received wisdom. Burst it.” - (page 247) Her goal isn’t to tick off a token for a company brochure or a stock photo. When she speaks about wanting to increase diversity in coding, it's for the sake of spreading her passion for the subject. The majority demographic is still overwhelmingly white and male, with a few women and an Asian minority. In fact, the amount of women coding in the states has lessened over the last ten years (source linked below). “And then, all through the course: the underlying assumption of male, white, geeky American culture. The crucial question, the answer to which determines how easily one crosses into the programming room—indeed, into any room—is this: Do you feel invited in?” - (page 254) Coding simply isn’t an ideal career for many, because when a culture remains insular, the same kind of people will flock to the culture. Think of the countless tales of a frat-boy culture in game programming, or Ullman’s own stories of dick-headed, male co-workers.But in spite of that, the magic of coding still hooks people like a drug. There’s a clockwork beauty to the way a program can function, much like the biblically awesome purity of maths. It’s the primary thing she salutes Roughgarden for: “He expects we will feel ‘some mixture of bafflement and intrigue,’ which is the perfect expression of learning computing as I experienced it: feeling baffled and intrigued, maddened and seduced” - (page 258) I salute her for trying to get people into coding in a human way understands the immature and uninviting environment that many find themselves trapped in. Somebody’s gotta do it. ---------------------------------------- coding demographics - https://www.zippia.com/computer-programmer-jobs/demographics/

reva

i feel a kinship with ullman and her position as a woman in the male-dominated world of coding. i am a physics major in college, and more and more with each passing year, i am surrounded by men in my major classes. ullman goes into detail describing the types of people she works with, with their quirks and flaws and biases, which inspires me to do the same. in my first two years, my physics classes were probably 75% men and 25% women, enough women that i didn't feel out of place. (for context i am nonbinary but like. "feminine presenting" i suppose.) most people are white or east asian. there are a decent number of south asians like me, but all men. in my third year, class sizes have decreased and suddenly it is me and two other girls in each of my major classes. this is really obvious when i look around but it doesn't make me feel out of place, because i genuinely love everybody i know in the major. a common type of person to encounter is a man (usually white, a lot of the east asian students are international students and mostly talk to each other) who is earnest and thoughtful, genuinely curious about what we learn in class and other subjects that interest them. this person spends their free time trying to solve problems they have posed to themselves, and having discussions with other physics students about them. i have always felt welcome and comfortable around these people, and interacting with them is part of what i love so much about my major. reading this chapter makes me feel extremely lucky for the experience i am having. imagining how i might feel in my major if i felt ignored or talked down to by my peers makes me feel kind of insane. something i've been thinking about lately is the way people build self-confidence and the ability to withstand prejudice. for me, i have never been discouraged from pursuing math and physics (i do think part of this is the particular model-minority stereotype of indians being good at math tbh). if somebody came up to me today and told me, directly or indirectly, that i don't belong in my major, i would find it ridiculous. what are you talking about?? i clearly belong here, and i've built that confidence through years of support from the people around me. but if people had been telling me that i don't belong since middle school or highschool, i would never have gotten the chance to build that confidence in the first place. so every time somebody said that to me, it would hurt a lot. and it would make me question if it was worth sticking with a major that caused me such emotional turmoil. it makes me so upset to think about this happening to other people. for example, people around the world learning to code from white male American nerds in their 20s. okay i have another personal anecdote to relay that was inspired by the contents of this chapter. i have been a math tutor at my school for about a year, and i tutor people in many different college math classes. i really really love my job. tutoring is hard and i've learned a lot about how to communicate and how to best teach people. and it makes me really happy to be able to help people in this way. over the last year, i have noticed that every single person i have ever tutored is equally good at figuring things out. what i mean by this is, once i have figured out which part of their problem they don't understand, and pose them a question that requires them to think carefully about it, everybody is equally fast at thinking through it and coming up with a solution. there are only two differences between students: the level of knowledge they are coming in with (which depends on the math classes they have taken in college and the quality of their highschool math classes) and their level of confidence in themselves. the students i have tutored who have "done the worst" (big air quotes) are the ones who clearly don't believe in their ability to pass the class. during appointments, they spend time anxiously talking about their upcoming exams and their overload of assignments, and less time trying to solve problems. i know that if they thought carefully about their problems, they would be able to figure them out just like everybody else, but their lack of confidence really impedes them from being able to do this. i know how this feels, i have experienced the black hole of fear that i am just not good enough for this hard subject and i absolutely cannot work effectively when i feel like that. and seeing other people feel this way makes me feel... so ANGRY that this has to happen to them!!! people will apologize to me for taking too long on a problem, or not understanding something right away, or just for being in a lower level math class that "must seem easy to me," and i just want to SHAKE THEM and tell them to NEVER APOLOGIZE FOR THEMSELVES!!!!!! that they are smart and capable and there is nothing different between us except for the classes we have chosen to take!!!!! aaaaarrgh!!!!!!! there is this idea built up in people's minds of math and physics being the "hard subjects" that some people just "cannot understand" (which is just not fucking true) and it makes people feel very insecure when they are attempting to learn and practice these subjects in front of math tutors and physics majors. and i get it, i get where the idea comes from. math and physics are often not taught well in schools, and any level of failure is immediately discouraged as your grades drop, which pushes people to give up early instead of trying harder. it all makes a lot of sense to me, but it still makes me angry. i hope that anger can drive me just like it drives ullman to pursue her dream of programming for the millions. it's the home stretch baby, see you all next week. <3

Just Connor

this chapter made me fully fall in love with this book. “When I worked for others, though, I was always certain my incompetence would be revealed at any moment. I had taught myself chaotically. I learned what I had to know when a job required it and where my interests randomly let me. I was aware at all times that I had only islands of knowledge separated by darkness; that I was surrounded by chasms of not-knowing, into one of which I was certain to fall.” this is how i feel about my writing. like at the end of the day i have a few points i’m sure of (the islands knowledge) and then i feel like everything i write is just floundering around attempting to communicate those points. when i’m done with a video essay script i just feel like i have a jumble of words. and then when i post i feel like someone will notice and comment “wait this guy doesn’t actually know anything”. ullmans description struck my core to say the least. “What I hope is that those with knowledge of the humanities will break into the closed society where code gets written: invade it.” fine…. the passion in this part makes me convinced to pursue some code stuff even though it feels like that’s the complete opposite of me. most of my closest friends are coders and i’ve always felt like the oddball. maybe learning coding will help connect me when them while helping them to understand some of the stuff i enjoy? idk but i can’t help but try after reading this chapter. “The ether of the internet does not purify the values imbued in the teaching of technology. It does not filter out social biases. Far from muting the social context, the internet is an amplifier. It broadcasts its value-laden messages around the world.” YES that’s all. i thought i didn’t want another tech book club book but instead i got the best tech book i’ve read and goddammit i can’t believe it’s almost over.

D.S Films

I love the depiction of the gatekeeping of technology and coding so people aren't free to decide what large companies do with their data when using tech, with small anecdotes. These small moments of belittling really are poison that prevents people from getting more into coding and changing the world.

Megan S.

[I am once again thumb tapping in the tub. My first instinct is to say it's not as good, but what I think I mean is that it's not as focused, not as intentional, not as insistent. I'm not pulled deeply in any direction. This doesn't feel like an activity. Still, I know it's a lie. I'm writing. The medium is not separate from the product, but it also doesn't negate it. Also, this feels like the only way I'm going to get these posts written. Something over nothing. I hope the quality will come.] [These prologues are also fun because I can come back to them like two weeks later and be like: oh shit I did not do something over nothing. I stressed about quality and didn't write anything. Actually, a more generous/true interpretation is that I have an abundance of Quality activities in my life right now, and sometimes (always) it is hard to choose. Ah well, here we are. I'm typing at my laptop. My fiancé is cooking a delicious lentil curry in the kitchen so our whole apartment smells of spices and coconut milk. I have tea. Life is physical and beautiful and real and I have many thoughts on pedagogy] *thoughts* I had initially titled this section "thoughts on teaching" but was instantly Overwhelmed by how many of those I had, so I'm tricking my brain. These aren't thoughts on teaching. they're just thoughts. we're just hanging out. dont worry about it. But I was a teacher for a year, and even though I didn't stick with it I think it did re-write my brain chemistry in a lot of ways. I'm also just coming out of a pretty intense phase of consuming as much Quality writing advice as I can find (which meant wading through a lot of writing advice stunningly devoid of Quality). so I do care. obviously. like, fuck. I share the goals of these instructors and the frustrations of Ullman. Teaching is hard. Learning is hard. "Warren says, often, that he wants this class to be fun" (250 internet archive version). I think the problem with this sentiment is that fun cannot be something stapled on after the fact. During my year of teaching, I had to teach these Common Sense powerpoint lessons about internet safety. I cared about the subject. I wanted it to be fun. I tried to make it fun. Here's the problem: the lessons weren't fun. I couldn't make then fun by being silly. Alternatively, when I taught coding through Minecraft, there was very little I could have done to stop the kids from having fun or learning. The activity had intrinsic and undeniable Quality. It reminds me of Pirsig's discussion on the ugliness of technology, on how companies will try to solve this problem of ugliness by adding Style, except now their technology isn't only ugly: it's ugly and fake. I think the phenomenon can occur within teaching. Teachers know that kids learn better when they have Fun, but Fun is as difficult to define and achieve as Quality so they try to staple Fun onto their lessons by putting memes in their powerpoints, or Big Bang references in their coding lectures. Only this doesn't solve the problem of boredom, it just staples Fun over the top of it. (to be clear, this is a very very very hard problem to solve. teaching is so hard yall. I couldn't hack it. I'm not judging teachers. theyre out here trying their very best.) so if Fun cannot be inserted into a lesson devoid of Quality, what can be done? Well, with coding lessons and with writing advice I think the goal should always be to lift up the inherent Quality of the activity itself. Look at the way Ullman describes coding: "I can almost feel the heat of my synapses firing, as in the experience of reading great literature and poetry. It is in these moments when I most want the technical outsiders and beginners to make it this far, to come in, fill the ranks, understand that the beauty in logic is as powerful as the beauty in any creative human endeavor." (262 kindle reader) just. look at it: You may find that, once you’re released from having to understand it all, a certain fascination gets through. It can be like those times you hear someone playing the piano beautifully or a sax wailing through jazz improvisations, and the sounds ignite a longing in you, a desire to take up the difficulties, and learn how to play that music. (260 kindle reader) “By “perverse” I mean the sort of experience that drags you into the unknown and abandons you there, and where, against all expectation, you find you like being. In other words, fun” (Ullman 240). She gets it. She’s interacting with the sacred. She’s doing art. How do we get there? how do we get other people there? How do we drag others into the unknown and abandon them there? It takes so much. its more then having the skill, its being able to systematically break that skill down into consumable pieces, its touching with the divine and then asking the divine if it wouldn't mind fitting itself into a nice little 50 minute lesson. it's so hard. it also feels like it might be the most important and most human thing we do? Somewhat related but also somewhat tangential discussion question: I have many Thoughts on what makes Quality art/writing advice, and wouldn’t mind talking about it more so here’s a question: what art/writing advice have you found that has dragged you into the unknown and abandoned you there? What made it work? I mentioned Tim Claire’s 100 day writing challenge at the Town Hall and I stand by that. He both shows this deep reverence and love for writing and Quality and gives you silly little writing games to help transport you to that same place of joy. https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/100-day-writing-challenge-day-50/id1101278771?i=1000466153079 *A silly little meme about my difficulty with actually writing these posts (or anything)* https://imgflip.com/i/95rwgq

halley

>programming for the millions< i've got two intense feelings aroused by this chapter that I'm working through forming into thought. the first one is my initial reaction of thinking about the violences imbedded in education, and feeling sympathetic for the kids I tutor and their fears surrounding starting a new school year and bullying. it's been weighing on my heart. I want to help them so badly, say some magic words that will make them realize how beautifully special they are and ignore the haters. I also know this is something they will all have to go through, everyone in their own ways, to confront the ugly truth of the world and develop their own resistances in response. I just wish I could use the wisdom I've gained from decades of trial and error to protect my younger siblings and students from going through the worst of it- instill some self-confidence to shield them from the brutality of grade school bullies, convince them of how much bigger their lives will get and that someday none of this will matter anymore. I think this is what Ullman is trying to do in her own way. she empathizes with the outsiders, those outside the target demographic making up the tech culture she's come to know, and is sharing the tactics she's honed over the years to deal with all the bullshit: "get what you need from this man; just get it." "pause the video; stab your finger in his eye; stick your tongue out at him; he cannot see you." there are two options when faced with an unpleasant reality besides sinking into despair. one is accepting "it is what it is" then trying to cope somehow- maybe it's for the best, actually. especially if you can't see or aren't affected by the biases, its much easier to ignore them. the other option is to confront it and do what you can to change that reality. Ullman's approach is relentlesly pragmatic and rationally hopeful. she doesn't shy away from anger but makes the case to "use it to fuel your determination". we must take everything as a test or lesson to make us stronger, simply because that is the most useful interpretation. "all prejudice is meant to slap you back and put you in your place." when confronted with the ugliness embedded in the reality of her field she has decided to use this negativity constructively, as righteous rage to blast open the gates of the gatekeepers. even in her imagined conversations addressing young people she assumes an idealistic perspective to illustrate her hopes for the future: "I see you new programmers, and you are saying: who exactly is that 'you' we are addressing, and what is the bias in that choice?" "you say, 'the answers *you* arrived at are mired in the biases of the past... those of *us* who have not succeded in the past are not in your databases- or, worse, *we* are, as bad risks." the other thought I've been sitting with lately is how we make meaning out of meaningless misfortune, particularly because I think Ullman does such an excellent job of it. when bad things happen to us we have to assign meaning somehow, to rationalize it, so that we can move forward. and since there often isn't some fixed inherent reason or meaning in the unlucky event itself, we have the freedom to decide how to make it make sense- to choose the most useful interpretation in the forming of the new self. >>>+<<< some additional tangents from the margin notes- 'reader-' (every time she addresses us directly like this I swoon a little bit. it's so intimate!) I love how she mocks the word salad of startup names simply by naming and listing them. so many of these brand names we're used to are just so unserious in an attempt to be the next cool thing. I've been pondering the similarities between knitting and coding since I saw the slide "knitting=code" in a youtube video about the physics of knitting, as well as this instagram post exploring the overlap between binary and weaving: (instagram.com/p/C_jPY_myX_g/?igsh=ZHN3MXBlbDUxbGRh). I started seeing my knits and purls as 1s and 0s, and the fact that I can read a complicated crochet pattern makes me think that maybe I could one day even learn html too! it also struck me upon rereading this how startup culture and knitting culture stand in such contrast to each other, with the fiber arts being regarded as generally uncool, slow, traditional, not for profit, mostly made up of older women but accessible to all, and the outcome being more personal and immediately practical. reminds me of the drama from a few years ago about the two startup guys who tried to make a new website to overthrow ravelry and the pushback they got from the knitting community. I like her encouragement for the general population to 'pierce the computing veil' to some degree without professional intentions. not every skill needs to be monetized, and learning just enough to 'demystify' the process can help users recognize some more of their autonomy in the interplay with their devices. when I've taken up new crafts and learned the process and effort that goes into it I end up valuing those kinds of items more from this deeper understanding. I think some level of familiarity or expertise is required for a fair appraisal and to not take things for granted. for example- from my little experience with weaving, when I see a beautiful handmade carpet I now have a sense of how much time it took, the effort and planning that goes into the aesthetic choices, and I can sympathize with the physical toll it takes on the body to produce such a work.

Lou Corben

yes please to more humanities moocs

yennik arual

"power lies in the refusal to be intimidated: in technical fearlessness" (271). let me deliberate my fears out loud for a sec "He says becoming a professional programmer takes patience, years and years of hard work studying computer science. “How long did you go to school?” he asks van Lent. “Ten years,” she answers. “Twenty,” says he." (267). ->->->->->->->->->->-> ok. there was a lingering doom that slowly encroached upon me as i read this chapter. i felt inspired to learn code but knowing how deep it goes, it seems like once i would get to a level of knowledge/skill that can actually be helpful to the issues at hand, there would be a whole new myriad of issues. we would be in a new decade, a new culture; the world may have ended proper. i'm also now at an age that has passed the point of accessing knowledge. if i had read this book with an equal amount of tension when it had first been published, i may have been compelled to follow code through the structure of my country's education system. but i am well past that now. the feeling is like an *opposite* to impostor syndrome, where instead of feeling untalented in a position of talent, i know i have strengths but i've entered the wrong context to use them. and i feel a little hopeless. my only salve is, i guess, the fact i have other skills that might be useful to people in programming that they don't have. i just interviewed someone about diversifying tactics of praxis and they poignantly said "let's just do what we can do, and celebrate what we can do and not worry about what we can't". i can write. i can perform. i can flesh out my experience with intercultural comms in linguistics to better ease working relations among coders. as i study semiotics more i can apply that to ui/sign design e.g. the "manburger" (269). heck, video essays (real ones, not commentary videos that claim to be essays) are their own mini, asynchronous oocs (the m in moocs, in this case, is mini). alternatively, they are a starting point to tumble into a discipline by snowballing through their readings and critically engaging with what each entry has to contribute. less structured than a formal mooc, but the quantity and quality of learning may be the same (again, if the essay is good! this is why you cite your sources! for everyone to see!). the medium is lowkey in dire need of a restructuring and refinement for reasons mentioned (and others not). but i have community in that and i can use skills to help improve it. i can take and consume them, too. and this is not discounting relevant skills and actions i can access outside of the web too. in like real reality i can lobby and sit-in and protest and serve soup. i can write and i can talk i can teach. and so, i can—will—[put into] practice the skills i do have whilst i [learn and] practise the skills i do not.