Jargon is part of any specialized field. Do you get mad when aerospace engineers use jargon like "apogee" or "lagrange point"?
If you have a specific question, I'm happy to answer it. But I'm not going to rewrite an entire article just because you refuse to learn what some words mean.
One of the most salient features of our Tech Hiring culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted.
My point of view is that every programmer can write code that is understood by the compiler, but the best programmers write code that is easily understood by humans.
Same thing here: everyone can write about in a way that is obscure and hard to read. Jargon is fine if you are sure that everyone works in the field and understands it, but it would be a mistake to assume that this is the case here.
Once I had the curiosity to read the four ground breaking scientific papers from Albert Einstein's miracle year of 1905 and it's ground breking stuff, like 10.000 times more important that whatever that blogger is trying to say, but it's surprisingly readable.
So is my basic assumption that whenever something is harder to read than Albert Einstein's papers - and that happens surprisingly often - it's not because it's profound but because it's as best written for the wrong audience, badly written, or at worse deliberately misleading us.
One of the most salient features of our Tech Hiring culture is that there is so much bullshit. Everyone knows this. Each of us contributes his share. But we tend to take the situation for granted.
Jargon is part of any specialized field. Do you get mad when aerospace engineers use jargon like "apogee" or "lagrange point"?
If you have a specific question, I'm happy to answer it. But I'm not going to rewrite an entire article just because you refuse to learn what some words mean.
Fine, you do what you want.
My point of view is that every programmer can write code that is understood by the compiler, but the best programmers write code that is easily understood by humans.
Same thing here: everyone can write about in a way that is obscure and hard to read. Jargon is fine if you are sure that everyone works in the field and understands it, but it would be a mistake to assume that this is the case here.
Once I had the curiosity to read the four ground breaking scientific papers from Albert Einstein's miracle year of 1905 and it's ground breking stuff, like 10.000 times more important that whatever that blogger is trying to say, but it's surprisingly readable.
The 1905 Papers - Annus Mirabilis of Albert Einstein - Research Guides at Library of Congress
So is my basic assumption that whenever something is harder to read than Albert Einstein's papers - and that happens surprisingly often - it's not because it's profound but because it's as best written for the wrong audience, badly written, or at worse deliberately misleading us.
Did you have an actual question or not?
I don't, have a nice day.