News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:15 years later: remote code execution in qmail by kstrauser on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @09:05PM (#23253844)
Oh, I don't know about that. There are lots of brilliant computer scientists and mathematicians with reputations for also being really nice and humble people. The smartest people I know freely admit when they're at the edge of their knowledge and abilities, and are the first to tell you when they've made mistakes.
Re:15 years later: remote code execution in qmail by derefr on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @09:11PM (#23253883)
You're talking about other people's motivations. But DJB minus ego wouldn't be some other person, he'd still be DJB; just "DJB if you cut a certain part of his brain out." And I don't think that that person would have any other motivation-generating part of his brain left. His works specifically seem entirely ego-driven. DJB minus the ego probably wouldn't have had any interest in becoming an information-worker at all. (I'd like to think he'd become a janitor, like the protagonist of Flowers for Algernon. :P)
Re:15 years later: remote code execution in qmail by kstrauser on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @10:17PM (#23254229)
I concede this point. May I modify my original statement? I wish DJB took motivation from non-ego sources, so that we could have the wonderful things he’s made, but even more wonderful because they were made by someone who knew they were fallible.
Re:15 years later: remote code execution in qmail by boolcow on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @09:48PM (#23254074)
Almost everyone who has worked really hard to be great at something has an ego about it. In most cases, they really wanted to be better than (often some specific) others.

To pick some well know people, I'd say Feynman and Einstein both had massive egos. They "knew" they were smart. They also had reputations for being really nice and humble.

It would be simpler to just admit that you think DJB is a bit of a jerk. Linus Torvalds is a bit of a jerk too, in most people's estimation. Brilliant jerks, we call them.

They can make great workers and are always terrible leaders.

Re:15 years later: remote code execution in qmail by kstrauser on Wednesday May 20, 2020 @10:15PM (#23254223)
There’s a big difference between self-assessed qualifications, and ability to admit fallibility. Good scientists know they know a lot. Great scientists know that they don’t know a lot, and admitting that you might be wrong is critical for the scientific method to work.

So DJB is brilliant, but if he admitted that he could make mistakes (or even that a compiled could mis-compile his flawless code), then he might have put in failsafes like unreachable code assertions that would have meant that we wouldn’t be discussing this today.

I don’t think he’s a jerk. I don’t know enough about him; maybe he’s the nicest, kindest guy around. I do think the evidence suggests that he’s arrogant, though, and that’s not a good look on anyone.