Having a strong opinion is not the problem. Acting as if your word is gospel and everyone else is wrong is. Just because you believe something doesn't mean you're right and doesn't mean that you shouldn't be able to change your mind.
@@trappedcat3615 I feel like that's in the same vein as being tolerant to everything but intolerance. Being tolerant to intolerance is no better than being intolerant--hence, being willing to change your mind about being willing to change your mind is no better than not being willing to change your mind. Obviously this might better be decided on a case-by-case basis, but it still seems very similar
The ancient Stoics talked about this. Marcus Aurelius had this to say in his personal diary where he wrote stuff he wanted to remember: "You always own the option of having no opinion. There is never any need to get worked up or to trouble your soul about things you can't control. These things are not asking to be judged by you. Leave them alone." Ryan Holiday had some extra commentary on this: "The Stoics saw opinion as the source of most misery. It’s what takes objective situations and makes them good, bad, wrong, unfair, essential, deserved or outrageous. It’s also what takes things that have nothing to do with us and makes them problems for us. Not liking what some other person is doing, not believing something outside of our control should be done the way that’s it’s being done, and on and on." I agree with the stoics' take, and since getting serious about life I try to have far fewer opinions, because they're likely to be sources of unnecessary and *useless* discomfort. I can discern, I can have principles, I can recognize something that was good or evil, I can take action accordingly, and I can speak the truth without hesitation -- but good god I don't need to actually have a position or opinion on everything that's happening outside of me and which otherwise doesn't affect me.
I think there is a difference between justifying your choices rather than convincing others what they should think. I think this is what this guy is going on about
I think it differs depending on where. At a company, it's important to have a standard, even if it's the 'wrong' one. I'd much rather work on a codebase where some choices are objectively worse than others, but it's consistent, and I know from package to package, what sorts of patterns I should be expecting. At that point, someones opinion has to win out and be enforced.
@@SeantheSkater96 unless those enforced opinions cause you hours of overtime and delayed jira tasks trying to debug and overcome the limitations of said enforced opinions.
@@SeantheSkater96 It doesn't even need to be at the scope level of a company, it can be the scope of a project. People might disagree and have different standards, but as long as you choose one and stick it for that project, its fine. I usually don't have strong opinion for standards, but you have to pick one, not having any standard is chaos.
@@thekwoka4707 " well, sure, enforced standards that actively cause issues " that's no excuse for not having any standards. you can even change standards later if you find they cause problems, the things IS they should be enforced, otherwise everyone there's always that person that will put the minimum amount of effort and every single file will be a different mess, it'll just rapidly turn into chaos.
i mean, a huge thing is that people also need to remember that you might not like something someone else does (pineapple on pizza). idm js, but i personally consider ts annoying and sorta a waste of time. but that's because i consider suggestions far worse then asserts. so idk, imo people need to look around and try something before they go hard on something
I love strong opinions, much better than a so-so answers. However, many strong opinions treat the opposite parties like a lower class compared to them. That, I will step 10 feet away.
Personally I don't care what kind of opinions you have, but hard agree on the "however" part. Anyone who treats others as a second class citizen for any reason (that doesn't involve someone getting hurt, like criminal behavior) is a second class citizen.
If you are really talking about strong opinions, then there is just no way that the people having strong opinions will ever compromise. They just won't be able to hang out with people that do not share their views. That is where the "lower class" situation comes in. If you still can hang out with people who don't share your opinion, then the opinion was not that strong to begin with. The way I see it. Its about putting yourself in the person's shoe that doesn't agree with you. If they have valid reasons to not share your viewpoint, then that is when the person with strong opinions can maybe compromise and can still hang out with the person that doesn't share their opinion, albeit still with some friction. If the reason is not valid, then I can tell you the two people will never see eye to eye. And honestly, that is okay. Not everybody needs to hang out with everybody. The worst kinds of people are people with strong opinions but they don't even do such introspection and just immediately think you are wrong for not sharing their opinion.
@scythazz I think it is the opposite, as in, people with strong opinion can still compromise on a regular basis. Maybe it is not even a compromise, but they will expand and evolve their opinion to encapsulate your viewpoints. I guess it all comes down to personal definition of "strong opinions." In my view, people with strong opinions are those who can stand up, argue, and protect their idea. If the argument is between two parties that are independent (e.g., on X), it is okay if an agreement is never achieved. In collaboration with active listeners, people want to achieve a common goal. Even with a clash of ideas, at certain points, people must all have an agreement to make progress, with compromise or not. I see that strong opinions come with experience. That's why I prefer listening to strong opinion, because 9 out of 10, that person is better in that domain than me. Not all opinions are strong opinions, even if the speaker claims otherwise, so I need to pick and choose on my own.
Others pointed it out, but the point is more about the existence of opinions at all. Convincing aims at changing someone else's opinion, it's not necessary to get your point across. Explaining is what's necessary. You can make a good argument for something by presenting it as an opinion: "why I prefer A". On twitter, people tend to do "why A is the absolute best and only solution worth considering". You can have a sound reasoning without trying to convince them this applies to them and their situation just as well as you and your situation. You can't argue without trying to convince, but you can explain without trying to convince.
My soft opinion is that strong opinions are best provided in long form content where context can be provided. I also see the utility in strong opinions when it comes to quickly understanding the opposing side's opinion.
The format of what you want to convey is so true, also the reality that if you're going to have a meeting about something, then people won't read what you sent. I believe Jeff Bezos said on Lex Friedmans podcast that the format you have to present something at Amazon in is a 6 page memo and they set aside 30 mins at the start of a meeting for everyone to read the memo, so everyone is on the same page. They then collect opinions, starting with the least senior and working their way up. Sounds like a great process, but would be hard to implement at a non-executive level.
I think there are room for both strong opinions and "kinda sometimes" opinions. Because the latter can still give you insight on the nuances of the matter, as, you know, life itself is filled to the brim with nuanced stuff. I've found time and time again that wise people's takes are most often than not nuanced.
Doesn't strong opinions weakly held mean that you don't have to force your opinion to make sense? Like if your opinion is really that good, you don't even HAVE to hold on to it because it won't go anywhere
if opinion is so good that everyone will agree on it anyway, then it's not an opinion anymore, at that point it's a fact. i tried to think of an example of what you describe and anything that that comes to mind is either better described by the word "fact" (eg. "sky is blue") or i can easily imagine someone arguing about it
@@AloisMahdal My opinion is that chocolate chip is the best cookie flavor. Not everyone agrees but it is my opinion. I love to try new flavors and I'm always open to a new flavor being my favorite, but until now my opinion hasn't changed. I feel like people forget how many things are considered an opinion. Even if something is widely accepted, if it can't be demonstrably and irrefutably proven then it's not a fact.
Funny thing I those "Strong Opinions" went through my mind too . Forming such strong opinions as youtuber or twitch streamer is their business model. While I can filter such inputs in software development space because I studied it gets really hard when its get harder when I go into let say physics . There is so much conflicting infos especially when is about the edge from what we know . I get from time to time confused. I don't think having an opinion is enough.
"Why do you need to convince others?" - Is really something that only someone asks who only works alone. Others people opinions matter because they affect you - directly or indirectly. You'll work together with people or their code and then this will affect you.
You need to have strong opinions; you need to believe in what you're doing because it makes your work better! Many people are afraid to say anything because they believe, deep down, they have nothing to contribute but rarely is that the case!
I need opinions what do people do for integration tests like what are you using? I’m currently thinking of what i should use for it in a embedded context.
The best way to convince someone is through inception... Even better, a sleep mechanism that allows groups of people to meet up in their dreams.... and then you can convince them in that dream environment.
Variadic Parameters urrg, i’d prefer arrays well depending on the language but if it’s using C ABI for that don’t simply don’t. Use Arrays it will make your live better.
I'm 90 seconds in and I'm thinking "get rid of 'strong'". You either have opinions you stand behind, or you don't. If you state a position clearly, you have an option. If you're mincing words and sound uncommitted, you dont have an option. This is, clearly, my opinion. It's not strong. It's not weak. It just is an option.
I listen to Max’s udemy courses at 1.25x and its like 1x normal people. I cant believe he talks irl at 0.8x. I feel like he is trolling everyone by manually slowing his videos by 15-20%
Personally I hate it so much arguing is done purely with opinions based on nothing but preference instead of facts, sometimes even missing any anecdotal evidence. Confidence and being the loudest seem to work great to get your way though.
Knox had a great point that I think was overlooked, tweeting it and posting videos is not the same it might come close when there is good faith, but not really.
Type vs var keyword - that’s the ultimate discussion. Var should of course be used everywhere unless Type is explicitly required. The reason is simple: var is like an interface to a concept. This requires a slightly different way of thinking when reading code. The “concept” is described by the expression after the assignment operator. This means the variable name and the expression must be descriptive and readable, so it leads to self-describing code that is easier to read/understand. And because we are coding to an interface (of a concept), future devs are free to refactor as they wish as long as the concept holds; they aren’t constrained by the type decided previously.
Opinions can only be changed with facts.... If your opinion is changed by the opinions of others, then it wasn't your opinion and the new one isn't either
I wouldn't know a tenth of what I know about programming today if it wasn't for me and all the other people around me sharing opinions, you guys included. Willful ignorance by means of avoiding discussion and/or persuasion is still just willful ignorance.
Ruh ROOOOE... Maximillian is under the PrimeTime heat-lamp. He's got good content as far as tutorials go. Lots of respect for Max, and Primes reaction... but ultimately who will win in a fight to the finish? I try to avoid X, Fakesbook, and working on the damn YT Shorts. "We need to quit worrying about const and let, and the little things... and focus more on Doom on a Poptart."
I think what he points out is trying to convice people in internet to use other things like they are their collegaus. What is going to change about your life when you convince a random person in internet to use what you want?
