I’ve been heads-down on a fun work project, and haven’t had time to post. Or read. Or eat with any regularity. We’re about to ship, so I should get back to my normal posting routine in a few weeks.

Are you a Dummy? David at 37Signals argues that the “Dummies” mentality is a weak form of thinking, where the reader of the book psychologically cheats themselves into the dummy mentality, helping to fulfill their destiny as such.

I think it’s simpler than that. The “Dummy” books (and their low-end counterparts) are crappy information. They’re like fast food and couch-ups for the mind. You put garbage information in, you get garbage thinking out.

I first noticed the GIGO textbook effect with a few books I bought on C++ in the early-mid 1990s. I knew C fairly well (thanks to K&R and Plauger), so I figured learning C++ would be a breeze. I picked up a few cheap texts at a local bookstore and went on my merry way. Months later I was still struggling with the language. I didn’t understand why until I went back to my old C texts: they were simpler and clearer than my new C++ books. The C++ texts were part of a newer generation of material infected with screen-shots, compiler-settings, and half-truths. They were horrible.

At the time, I couldn’t discern between good information and bad, and I had filled my head with a bunch of weak metaphors and buggy examples. The problem was that I didn’t realize that there was a difference in quality of information, and how important that quality was to learning. And it wasn’t just the correctness of the information either, it was the whole approach to critical thinking that an author impresses on you: things like how a language should be used, what was intended, and how it actually works.

Later I relearned C++ through the eyes of Stroustrup, Plauger, comp.lang.c++, and such. It was a different language. There was no mystery. I knew what should be possible, and where to look when it wasn’t.

Warped as it was 8 years ago, in all of its eye-grating goodness.¹ Word.

1. And before in-browser spell checking. ↩

Why programmers should play Go. A good argument for stretching your thinker in weird and wonderful ways. I’ve played my share of Go over the years, and while I can’t claim to be good at it, I can say that it has changed how I think. The important thing to remember, though, is that the stretching isn’t just a result of learning the game, it’s also the result of thinking about the game, and reflecting on the patterns of play and tactics.

A taxonomy of programmers describes what various levels of programmers are capable of. The paper was written with procedural programming in mind, but most of it is relevant to newer languages.

Someone asked me today what my favorite tech blog was. I had to think about it a bit, but I eventually decided that HackThePlanet is hands-down the best thing since sliced silicon. I’ve been reading it since 2000, and I still enjoy every post. It’s a hardcore tech geek blog that’s avoided whoring itself, posting hardcore nerd things semi-regularly. Kudos.

Busy versus Productive, an interesting contrast. The question is: do I agree with the article because it’s what I already think, or is the author’s comparison valid? (via 37Signals)

Subtraction points out a large Flickr set of user interface elements, a slick repository of web interface element metaphors. I love pointing developers at good examples, and then watching their imagination explode.

A good case against forced signups, and a sweet metaphor for easing users into signing up.

A set of design patterns in pictures. Metaphors are cool (thanks pk).