They're Still Standing or On Passion in Programming or The Soultron Lesson

[clean]

I

I've said it in another thread here: helmut85 is clean. It had never been my intention to make trouble or bother people, it just had been a very unfortunate mishap that my two introductory posts here, more than a year ago, had been mistaken for "spam" when it was totally evident that they couldn't be considered as such, hence my anger that threatened to bias my judgement further on, hence my choice to write some 50 further posts as helmut85, in order to perfectly calm down things. Of course, I cannot totally deny my nature, so things tend to run high, under whichever pseudonym I could ever post (cf. hits for "On data storage and applications going cloud" from which this thread's a spin-off).

In fact, I'm a little bit ordealed in a way: I'm an amateur programmer who in the late Nineties, did a very fine pim, "Manuscript", flawed by the use of an inferior programming language, the one in "ToolBook" (= Paul Allen, from MS), with a 32 KB field limit and, especially, lack of stability by lack of proper memory M, so that any way of sophisticated programming didn't do anything to overcome the programming language's inherent instability (I have "proof" of this by numerous complaints of third parties in these times; the 32 KB limit seems to persist even today).

The name of "Manuscript" was daring, but then, the original Lotus "Manuscript" trademark hadn't been used for 5 years, so I didn't name my product in any illegal way (btw, the text processing sw of my choice then hadn't been Lotus Manuscript, but XyWrite, an incredibly sophisticated prog marketed by North American SW, that company that also marketed askSam in Europe at the time). From a conceptional pov, it was outstanding, i.e. it was a cascade of indentations, instead of a tree, since my programming capabilities always fell short of my my conceptional  mastery, and thus my work produced some very original solutions to common problems: I wasn't able to properly program the standard solution, so I had to look out for alternative ones, and often I found rather smart ones.

Anybody interested in a description of this outstanding and obscure sw, or in further ideas of mine, is invited to refer to the defunct askSam forum, searching under "fred", to the MyInfo forum ("fred"), to the outlinersoftware.com forum ("fredy", "fred" was taken), and to the Ultra Recall forum, under "schferk".

You bet that, when designing and programming "Manuscript", I delved deep into theory, hyperspace and all that, all the early research on information technology; later then, Yourdon, Warnier, etc., and, being a stranger to programming, I did "Manuscript" in object-oriented programming style notwithstanding, and applying at least some sw engineering standards to my work.

Then, I sold 4 or 5 "light" versions of this prog (= before (my introduction to) the net, by bookstores - some bookstores, at the time, sold sw beyond books and women's devotionalia, like greeting cards, candles...).

But you bet that with not even 300 bucks for more than 1 year of hard work, I left this field...

II

And then, I hoped that superior programmers would deliver some superior pim, perhaps not as good as mine had been, by conception, but something decent and technically superior.

Well, we're more than 15 years later now, and nothing really good has been done (except, perhaps, in Zoot).

These last days, I had the incredible chance to stumble upon some "Got Talent" and such posts on YT.

There's no doubt that YT is an International Treasure (pun intended to "National Treasure", of course), not because it gives free access to classic performers you otherwise had to pay for, but because it gives access to obscure performances that are world-class, and which otherwise, you'd never had a chance to even know of, let alone appreciate and fall in love with.

I'm not going here to invite you into obscure French Art Cinema, knowing that sw-affiliated guys (and the one Lady here) are much more rooted to the soil, which in itself hasn't to be something bad. But then, I need to explain something. It's the nature of passion.

Have a look at this YT vid, http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=g0IxVocQZiw

It's about Jack Vidgen, 14 years old winner of Australia's Got Talent 2011, a compilation of his 3 great songs in that competition, especially the first one, "I Have Nothing", brought to fame by Whitney Houston, written by David Foster and Linda Thompson and without no doubt one of the utmost works in the history of pop music. Now watch 14-year-old Jack delivering this song: From a shy beginning to incredible mastering, and you literally see him "thinking", sensing:

This is possible! And this, encore! And just a pitch higher: Everything is possible here!

It's an incredible crescendo into utmost mastering and one of those reasons YT must survive at all cost (and yes, I'm in love with the accent of this boy, as I had been in love, many years ago, with the accent of a young Irish girl singing) - "at all cost" meaning, I'm certainly prepared to pay 20 or more bucks a month for YT whenever this will become necessary to have continuing access to it.

Now look what our young Vidgen did then, after winning this contest and the 250,000 australian dollars that came with it. Well, he's an adolescent, don't blame him - blame his managers, his entourage. In this Australia's Got Talent performance, watch Brian McFadden (the judge on the left): He's falling in love, and rightly so, splendour is a thing so rare you HAVE to immediately react. And afterwards, it's "marketing", it's about making money, it's about maximizing profit - the spell's long gone.

It's of no interest to discuss if the passing of Whitney Houston, or the passing of Amy Winehouse, was that utmost loss in music these last months (and yes, Nickolas Ashford passed away, too), but there's no doubt "Whitney Houston songs" are among the treasures of today's music (and I cite the composers expressly since some dumb people out there really think these songs are written by the singers, and that actors write the scripts of films they starr in). Have another look at YT: Here comes Aliyah Kolf, 11 years old and the future definite Soul Queen:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=DlWHQXnF3KA

It's the same song - ok, the voice isn't there yet, but this voice leading and this timbre is world class (and I'm deeply in love with this accent, too: this "look" here, shortly after the beginning, I haven't heard anything as cute in my life, except in Vidgen's interpretation of the same song) - again, a screscendo into pure joy, into sheer heaven.

In quite another range of music, there's Emily Elbert, whose performances are very uneven, whose voice is sub-standard most of the time, and whose highs very easily can get on your nerves. But then, two of her songs she wrote herself, at her very young age, Dialed In & Opened Up,

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=i54XX1mg3KE

where nobody could claim it hadn't got the right groove in it, and then, her masterpiece so far, Michelangelo, which, had it been written by Joni Mitchell, everybody'd call world class, and since it's written by some young Emily Elbert, only some cognoscienti know and appreciate:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=vhmOFjcl-4w

Don't be mistaken, this is some of the very best of music that has been written in this century, and in the last one combined (I said it, her peaks are ugly, don't let you be mislead by such irrelevancies).

And it hasn't got anything to do with looks: Of course, I've fallen head over heals for this gal, some time ago yet, and I wouldn't hesitate to make a dozen of children to such a splendour if she ever was consenting, but then there's some Azerbaijanian jazz pianist called Isfar Sarabski who settled down to some more traditional jazz / "ethnic jazz" now, but his beginnings are filled with some false notes, and lots of passion which enabled him to do some of the most extraordinary piano solos I've ever heard in my lifetime (and from my youth, I cherish, and up to my deathbed, recitals from masters like Wilhelm Kempff, Emil Gilels or Sviatoslav Richter): Just search for "Isfar Sarabski Barnsdall" or "Isfar Sarabski Vibrato", especially the part 2 where pure joy easily overrides those wrong keys he presses here and then:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=7R41OHlLKKI

Or then, Isfar Sarabski at the Baku Jazz Festival 2010, from minute 56:00 and for the next seven and a half minutes, very sweet and to be classified Art, with a big A:

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=E7srIho2CpU

Or in a more traditional range, what about (George Gershwin's) "Summertime" by the Ray Brown Trio, i.e. the late Gene Harris on piano?

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=YuW26BKVJ3U

All these do NOT do it for the money, they are in LOVE with what they are doing, and it shows. (And no, I'm not bothering you with Schubert and Schumann (Kreisleriana, anyone?) here - there dead and forgotten by the plebs.) But have a look at this guy: Danny McClain's interpretation of "I Love You More Than You'll Ever Know" (which is from 2004, he should be an international superstar by now, and he isn't: see my point?):

http://www.youtube.c.../watch?v=1wxEV4M1rSU

(And no, it's not by Donny Hathaway, nor by Gary Moore, but by Al Kooper from Blood, Sweat & Tears.)

III

Now back to sw. We now see, by direct comparison, that most programmers are NOT driven by passion, and that they stop whenever they ain't paid enough anymore for their work (my case being extreme and thus not representative here).

And this brings me to a conclusion since the French have a saying, which is,

Ne demande à chacun ce qu'il peut donner.

Meaning, don't ask people what they ain't able to deliver.

The other way round: I didn't stop "Manuscript" because of these 4 or 5 sales-only, but because I would have to do it all again within a decent programming language, and not being a programmer, and not knowing of the existence of programming components at the time, I simply gave up, facing my missing programming capabilities and not knowing where to start anew, and on the other hand, I don't think anymore, today, that most programmers are perfect sw designers, and thus one-man shows in the sw field do have a big problem: Technical brilliance is sometimes there, but then, design quality is often lacking, and worse, they don't even listen to you when you explain to them how to do it instead - ok, as a naked assertion, this must sound incredibly pompous, but then, proof's plenty in those aforementioned fori, and when, in a rather sophisticated outliner like UR, there isn't even formatting within the tree, and for many, many years, stinginess and shortsightedness of the developers become apparent (= such trees are components, at different prices, you know... - same for the edit fields, etc., and most developers prefer them to be free...)

But this standstill of the industry (cf. UR and many more, e.g. Surfulater and his creator, Neville Franks, who anytime returns fall under his "acceptable" level, does something else) revolts me.

IV

So, I'm looking out for a top-notch programmer now. There's some money I can invest, and be sure that man that will take the other 50 % of proceeds, only 50 % of proceeds going to you, is one of the best sw architects out there when it comes to IM (cf. AS, MI, outlsw.com, UR fori) - and yes, the "Manuscript" source code is available for people with credits. Contact me by private message.

It's time we all get a decent outliner, 35 years after the intro of the pc. And that means development up to state of the art level, and not the Neville Franks / Ultra Recall / Mindjet / Controllers Rule way. Without love, in art and in programming, there's no excellence to be found.

And yes, the best female composer of all time is Carole King - or then, is it Laura Nyro? You got my point, hein? Money isn't everything, especially after you'll be dead. And yes, I consider Robert Carr's Framework, conceptionally-wise, the best sw of all time. "Better" sw's, then, built up on that masterpiece. Today, they serve us crap, mainly.

[Paul Keith]

clean, just a suggestion but I think you are better off reframing the thread into a coding request for someone who will continue with manuscript.

Some people like skwire who tend to respond from a "feature request" PoV may not read to the last part and realize this is a recruitment thread because it's way below in your post.

Others may not quite follow the relation between decent outliner, music and manuscript. Not because of the presentation but because it's three different concepts. Sound, outline, drafting.

A clearer prototype or mock-up presentation of Manuscript would better clear up what decent outliners are. You also have to consider that outliners are not clippers too often. When you merge those two, you have to expect people to understand what type of outlining/clipping functionality and interface you really mean when you say decent.

Surfulator could be decent to someone who has no idea of it but the way you can't search or stumble on it accidentally by doing a search for FF Add-ons always held it back from the same potential testing base that services like Evernote provided.

You also did not explain what makes Zoot special conceptually.

Still...even with all this, DC may not be the right forum to do such recruiting. Maybe Hacker News or Stack Overflow or AskReddit could be your prime site but DC has no history of developing such a concept.

It's also worth mentioning that to many common users, OneNote and hardware like the Samsung Galaxy Note are what's known as decent outliners to them.

Ignoring the mentioning of how your decent outliner would differ from these programs will confuse your intended audience even if they understand the entire thread. Remember nowadays notes can be voice notes so keep in mind that when music is used as an analogy, you have to make sure you meant it as an analogy of passion and not that one of the features of a decent outliner is music/voice/Siri-capability.

[clean]

Paul, as always, there is much truth in what you say. In outlinersoftware.com there, they do endless discussions about the perfect outliner, but then, nobody anywhere does any real work in order to attain it, and I wrote so much on this subject in the past, I simply don't have the guts anymore to do it again. It's right what you say, clipping and outliners drift apart - that's because most outliners ain't suited to proper clipping (hence those millions of people going to Evercrap). And yes, some day I should search for a programmer for good! (I didn't even polish my post above yet, you know...) Of course, I suppose that people should know about Zoot, and all these outliners, in order to be interested in my post re sw - for people not particularly fond of outliners, the links will do, and indeed they link to some of the most pleasant (and largely unknown) music available today - unfortunately, all these magazines like Time, L'Espresso, Nouvel Observateur, etc., etc. do NOT hint their readers to splendid, "unknown" music, thus ensuring things remain as they are for such wunderful artists, and so I took the liberty here of presenting some obscure artists who largely deserve to be much better known than they are, as illustrations of my point that without passion, there is no excellence and no superior quality - which is, as I also tried to express, a question of "design", not of technique - all of these artists, even Gene Harris, show technical flaws, but the overall performance is simply magnificent, in every case I cited here.

My music examples were meant as counter-examples to what's going on in the sw industry: Utmost quality is possible, but of course only when your heart is brought to the venue, and that's not the case with progs like UR that are indeed rather "good", but that simply stop at this point of diminishing financial returns, and thus will never be really good. (As said, all the ugly details, and my ideas, in all these innumerable posts in these fori - I decidedly have to create a blog, in which I must bring together all these.)

EDIT : "Remember nowadays notes can be voice notes" - Zoot introduced some voice recognition, but in fact, DNS has got the monopoly on this. It would lead nowhere to develop special functionality, poorly executed, when there is a brilliant market leader as in this case. On the other hand, it'd be smart to introduce, for ordinary-DNS users, much DNS functionality into your program, i.e. DNS has got a very expensive "professional" version normally needed for macros and such, whilst it would be of high interest to have the normal (and accessibly-priced) DNS version do lots a things within your specific program - could perhaps be done by paying them 20 bucks for each prog you sell with this inbuilt functionality (I mean you sell two versions, the normal one and the one that for people having got normal DNS, then offer lots of additional command triggering that in normal DNS isn't available as such - so your customers would have DNS Prof functionality within your prog by just owning the regular DNS version). Whilst Zoot, if I understand well, has some proprietary "voice command" functionality, but if the user wants to dictate contents, he's to rely on that external DNS then. Such a mixture is exactly that kind of hybrid chaos I'd never accept in a decent workflow.

[Paul Keith]

In outlinersoftware.com there, they do endless discussions about the perfect outliner, but then, nobody anywhere does any real work in order to attain it, and I wrote so much on this subject in the past, I simply don't have the guts anymore to do it again.

-clean

Ahh...but see there's where you are mistaken.

You don't have to write the guts anymore. That's out there, what you lack is the boobs (of the concept) to attract the right mix of contributors to your vision.

It's crass but it's true.

This is what separates software visions from software production. Even if vision can do, it also has to teach the producer how to "create something out of nothing".

This is why Steve Jobs can still have something to offer despite marketing having become both an overpaid corporate job and something every one person with money can apply. You can't replicate human vision because human vision is not just some motivated idea with a motivated coder, it's a platform that convinces people to do even greater things on it. (or worse things/or hate it for being a vision instead of just a sw/hw)

To create an analogy between music and software, the passionate musician still needs the internet or shop seller to create an access point and every shop has a different immediate early bird user who are crucial in producing first passionate identity for a software.

Any decent software who introduces it in a shop where the audience cares less for the product is bound to receive insufficient traction or any attention at all.

For example, I bet regardless of how slick the product is, if a software was given a better title like Manuscript in DC...there will be only a few user using it compared to FARRO (Find and Run Robot Outliner).

Given enough great quality, there will still be users but not enough users and "modders" who will see Manuscript like they would see the Twitter API.

Continuing on is the deceptive road. This is where the likes of Steve Jobs differ from the average "marketing = attention".

Software, like music, means it's one thing to just use the internet to upload music, it's another thing to provide vanity. Vanity for some coder to drop all that they are doing to "serve" FARRO. Vanity for the maker of Manuscript to write a long forum post on Surfulator. Vanity for skwire to pay attention to a thread and spend time on a software. Vanity for the music lover to just listen and view music and follow the band without all the "shoulds" which allows a band to last a generation or two.

That vanity simply does not come from recruiting a programmer to make real a concept you want. Someone as good as skwire will only go so far on the software before he starts thinking about the name and the icons and the mascot of the software and fans of skwire won't help him push those softwares up but neither will critics. Only competing ideas that tugs on skwire's vanity would.

For example, limiting only to DC regulars, you can never make a programmer you hired fulfill your vision of a decent outliner unless you can fulfill their vision along with your vision without creating bloat.

...but, like music, that's not the end. Decent sound alone does not make for decent music. Decent sound is produced by decent lyrics, decent emotional return, decent context of where to hear the sound and decent appreciation of how much you access, payed and vainly feel you've connected with the artist...and it only works if the artist can continue stimulating and diversifying you with their songs.

If they simply created one of the best music in history, not only will that music not be popular compared to crappier music but if the rest of their music and followers have bad taste in music...it's all a flash in the pan.

What this means is that...say you got skwire to be your recruit and skwire gets all your needs and gets all his needs and it's time to play the music.

Unless you have a human lyric analyzer like IainB for that outliner, you will never be able to get the "clipping of statistics" versus "plain clipping". Even IainB does not code for you, you need to hire him and listen to him simply so that skwire will have a more numerical outline workflow different from your average outliner.

...but neither are enough because one is biased (skwire) and another is neutral (IainB). You need another polarizing figure and a disagreeing figure to "create" magic.

You need a band who (hypothetically) can turn my hypothetical model of IainB's and skwire's special bullet points from this design:

Name of Clipped Page
(You have clipped 50% of this webpage)
[Clip page] - (click to reveal)
Dates involved: 1711 (link new timeline)
Locations involved: Great Britain (add another location)
Search events: South Sea Bubble

Notes:
-Write on DC
--Posted

and convert it with my hypothetical of TaoPhoenix's and App's interface model of:

Name of Clipped Page
(Clipped: 50%) [green button] (shows only honest highlights) [red button] (shows lies)

[Click to reveal dishonest outline of clip]

Spoiler

-Great Britain created an artificial economic situation that led an economic depression tag: Artificial

[Click to reveal honest outline of clip]

Spoiler

-EU allowances for delivery in December sank to a record 4.79 euros ($6.37) a metric ton on the ICE Futures Europe exchange on 2013-01-21T12:11:25Z

[Set TaoTags: Caring for dogs]

[Show Tao Notes]

Spoiler

Economic depression increases: (clip) Skinny dogs nose through the piles looking for scraps.

Read more: http://world.time.co...looms/#ixzz2JBpZ58Mk

[Proposed To-Do]
[Hard]Send your dog to another country
[Medium]Train your dog to be more conservative and walk him less
[Easy]Stack up on foods

Notice how those two interfaces while essentially having the same mechanic and dynamic changes in aesthetic simply by adding some of TaoPhoenix' view with that of App's philosophy of pure, honest, simple software. It's not always advanced functionality that's lacking in decent outliners but advanced visions of empathy, passion, utilization and "human building" (as opposed to machine learning).

Imagine how much more the interface can morph if you add Carol Haynes' vision, mouser's vision, Stephen[insertnumber]'s vision, kalos' vision, wraith808's vision, Renegade's vision, 40hz's vision, etc. (sorry for the users who weren't mentioned like tomos who I had in the back of my mind as a first name choice but for some reason my mind blanked out when I actually started to write)

You don't have to insert all these people's feature suggestions as it will bloat it up and change the focus of your guts but, again, I apologize for being crass but if you're a male dog lover: the boobs of a female dog lover looks different from the boobs of a female dog hater,

...however if you just keep dating a female dog lover instead of say a wolf dog lover. Your decent outliner can never evolve differently enough to meet your vision of outlining as you evolve and communicate more with people who have the same yet different vision for an outliner unless you can hire a programmer who just happens to have more of a hunger and knowledge than you do at pushing your vision.

It's the same with music. Unless it's great different music like say Aussie themed music rather than great American music, music stops being decent and we'll all just be trapped hearing the same annoying genre songs regardless of how great they are. Every song needs to go through a stage of rock and roll as well as tranquility as well as classical symphony. Similarly, every decent software needs to have a little bit of rebellious design within it's guts and you can only get those by having the vision to create boobs to produce the common weal out of different entities as opposed to the reverse where the common weal have become a community and they all get together to create a software. It just won't change things. People in outlinersoftware.com or people in DC who are simply sold by the cash and guts will more often try to satisfice your guts while hoping they can get more of your cash.

If you want to create better but different (undervisionized) software, you need to be able to add boobs to the guts of your concept. It doesn't mean if it's hardware or software or a piece of paper like money or constitution. Any man can lament underproduction until they see the super production of wage slavery of outsourcing and factory work during the industrial age but what makes decent different outliners happen as it was envisioned or as it came from missing opportunity remains in the end the ability of boobs to magnetize both men and women of different visions and different needs to compromise and work together on something that turned out to be something not there.

P.S. Btw for those thinking I just want to be crass or apathetic or misogynist and I could have chosen a better analogy, I apologize but I simply can't think of any other concept that matches the same attributes as an analogy.

See the similar thing between boobs and outliners is that they can sometimes be in basics just fats. A guy can create boobs by being fat and getting manboobs. An outliner user can create a different outline simply by turning it into a PIM and adding the fat of tags and indexing of files without any creativity.

Both concepts though while simple attract vanities, philosophies and a who's who of people. Yes, in the shallowest of misogyny, it just attracts a man to a woman but in real social interactions...sometimes it's the woman who wear fake bras, sometimes it's the man who sees more rather than less with an A cup. It's also just not related to sex. There's breastfeeding, there's how the larger ones get in the way of athletics and hurt the spine, there's it's influence in the fictional depiction of comic book characters.

It has a harmonizing effect on par with say...the Founding Fathers of different principles and philosophies and different timelines coming together that differentiates itself from the hollow networking and recruiting of coders, marketers, salespeople. It's just a necessary coming together to create and send out both great undervisionized music and decent undervisionized outliners.

Maybe if I have a high charisma or this post was short then I could have dodged the analogy for an example but, as most of you know, I don't. It just fits the criteria of what I wanted to show. As with most of my posts, I pick the closest short word analogy I can think of at a moment's notice and unfortunately it just happens to be a word strongly associated with NSFW.

[clean]

"Ahh...but see there's where you are mistaken.

You don't have to write the guts anymore. That's out there, what you lack is the boobs (of the concept) to attract the right mix of contributors to your vision.

It's crass but it's true."

Paul, that's why I said, in the other thread, that you're my friend (I'm yours, in any case.). We both seem to have big probs in style, but we both have to "GIVE something" to this world, and are often mistreated, bec/of our style that hampers our message. You're perfectly right here (again), and I know this. We all have to live with our limitations, haven't we? But that's no reason for not trying to overcome some of them, I suppose. You defended tags over "hierarchies" / trees, and I have been a little bit mean over this in the UR forum: It's you that were mistaken here, but I beg your pardon for the style I answered you in. Further comments will follow, but let me say here that people who try to change this world for the better often end up crucified, human nature doing this, and it's the tragedy of this world that will eventually bury it, hence my love with excellence, passion and real suberb, and I perfectly know about the missing "market value" of these criteria, hence my search for people who are like those I cited in my intro post here: People who're in search for excellence, notwithstanding the financial outcome. Here and then, I try to be a cynic, as I've got to know that being cynic is the way of the world, but then, I cherish the gifted heroes who do put their heart in what they do, and thus, it's not a coincidence that almost all of those artists I cited are young or very young: The drama of human existence being that for adult life, financial considerations MUST take over since without shifting your priorities, you won't be able to take care of your family: Society makes whores, and there's nothing that could ever be done about it, cf. these "free love" communities of "1968" that failed because of the "big shots" attracting the females, as in any traditional society formation, and the "neglected" men jumping out from an idea of "equal society" ( I don't bring links to sources here, but there's plenty of them).

I fact and to tell everybody (who didn't already get it), I'm one of these "romantic fools" who seriously think that human nature, applying the right argumentation, is able to be changed for good, when in real life, we all know this is impossible, genes preventing every possible change to a better human nature.

I conceived and propammed "Manuscript" in a way of endless improvement, implementing lots of high-brow features totally unknown at the time (and some of them, even today), and then, I got 5 "sales", for the crippled (I limited the number of possible items there) versions, and I thought by myself, "are these people buying my light version in order to steal my ideas, to do "re-engineering"? Which is to say, I didn't take the smallest "satisfaction" from these 5 sales, but they made me fearful, more fearful that I'd had ever been. (Thus my current emphesis on "legal" questions, since I'm fearing that some of my ideas in "Manuscript" could be - or have already been, without my knowlege? - could be patented by the U.S. Patent Office, so that in my own future pim prog, I would be a "criminal" to use my own ideas from 1995.)

Unfortunately, I choose another subject in university, beyond "IT" / programming, and I'm too old now in order to really learn programming from scratch. I've to admit that I feel some envy on being informed, by somebody like Neville, by his editor's price, and the number he claims to have sold this editor, when then making my multiplication. But then, I've never envied, in my whole life, people who did something really good, something really "completed": I CHERISH mastering, but I've got lots a probs with cold reasoning.

My "music" examples were about people who "went the extra mile", and who didn't mind if the financial outcome was on par - hence my departure with Vidgen in that competition and the same Vidgen later on, trying to "collect". Some months ago, I tried to convince "kinook", the people / man behind Ultra Recall, that "doing better" was to give him real financial benefits, when in fact, I don't really know about this.

Truths is, the "financial returns" aspect in programming doesn't interst me that much: As soon as you can make your living / survive with programming, you've got all your chances

TO MAKE PROGRAMMING AN ART.

And that's my subject. Conceiving "solutions" that will survive you, creating programs that will make you a "name" in the history of this civilisation: Doing perfect sw, as is "Guernica" a perfect painting.

Hence my suffering, any day, that my own, personal programming facilities are not on par with what I'd create, had I got this technical expertise. And hence my "hate", better, my scorn, for these delevopers who're striving after the "bucks", instead of trying to get their name printed into the IT "hall of fame".

And yes, I would make "my coder", here and there, code some irrelevant lines which on further thinking of mine, will have to be dumped, but then, there won't be so many of them: Trust me, as a sw conceptionalist, I'm not devoid of some gift: I'm far from sadist who'd make you code futil: It's not about becoming millionaires, it's about delivering a first-class piece of art to these humans, and then, with a little chance (but which wouldn't be our target), we didn't loose our money in this venture.

And Paul, you're of my kind: We're some some people who try to be helpful to this world. We're one of a kind, when most people deciced to be nourrish their family. I can't even blame them, but then, I've got the right to be deeply disappointed with the way of this world I so much would like to improve. And to hell with cynics on outlinersoftware.com.

Trying to get a coder, a brilliant one: One well assorted to my ideas.

And yes, I'm speaking about endless, hard work. And yes, I'm speaking of immortality, and of contemporaries still standing to us. Your programming language: Python, or such? Let's conceive big, notwithstanding the fact that whatever we'll do together, we'll never attain that mastering level of an Al Kooper.

And people who place some symbols in sole response to what a Paul Keith has to say, aint' but idiots, sorry for being being blunt again, and I say this not in order to attack, let alone to hurt, but in order to make you think again.

IT, in its current state, is a shame. Thus, I beg you, some excellent coders coming my way: I'd treat you well, i.e. with duly respect: All the more so since I got early aware of my limitations in coding.

[Paul Keith]

I might have missed your reply in that post. I'm actually more of a hierarchies/tree guy and I would never defend tags over trees in isolation. Perhaps you could better explain where you got that impression or link back to the reply you wrote?

I perfectly know about the missing "market value" of these criteria, hence my search for people who are like those I cited in my intro post here

-clean

Marketing is not market value though. There are of course branches and departments nowadays but the heyday of marketing has been art value (product identity) meets people (customers/clients) using research (research/math/stats) in a never ending recycling package that works in harmony with the product.

People who're in search for excellence, notwithstanding the financial outcome.

-clean

See that's just not how excellent people work. People search financial outcome and become excellent provided the finances were good enough to supply and maintain their body and their tools. (Peace of mind also works.)

Here and then, I try to be a cynic, as I've got to know that being cynic is the way of the world, but then, I cherish the gifted heroes who do put their heart in what they do, and thus, it's not a coincidence that almost all of those artists I cited are young or very young: The drama of human existence being that for adult life, financial considerations MUST take over since without shifting your priorities, you won't be able to take care of your family: Society makes whores, and there's nothing that could ever be done about it, cf. these "free love" communities of "1968" that failed because of the "big shots" attracting the females, as in any traditional society formation, and the "neglected" men jumping out from an idea of "equal society" ( I don't bring links to sources here, but there's plenty of them).

-clean

There are certainly exceptions but most gifted passionate artists turn out to be young ALSO because they are the ultimate whores.

The olympics being one of the best example of this excellence where in boys as early as possible are indoctrinated into a particular activity of excellence to hone their passion on a particular sports even without being given an opportunity to have a choice outside of it.

Especially when the media, the tournament rankings and the top of the top niche communities know you, these boys end up having zero choice except to continue on with that path until their excellence allows them to step away from the rat race.

I conceived and propammed "Manuscript" in a way of endless improvement, implementing lots of high-brow features totally unknown at the time (and some of them, even today), and then, I got 5 "sales", for the crippled (I limited the number of possible items there) versions, and I thought by myself, "are these people buying my light version in order to steal my ideas, to do "re-engineering"? Which is to say, I didn't take the smallest "satisfaction" from these 5 sales, but they made me fearful, more fearful that I'd had ever been. (Thus my current emphesis on "legal" questions, since I'm fearing that some of my ideas in "Manuscript" could be - or have already been, without my knowlege? - could be patented by the U.S. Patent Office, so that in my own future pim prog, I would be a "criminal" to use my own ideas from 1995.)

Unfortunately, I choose another subject in university, beyond "IT" / programming, and I'm too old now in order to really learn programming from scratch. I've to admit that I feel some envy on being informed, by somebody like Neville, by his editor's price, and the number he claims to have sold this editor, when then making my multiplication. But then, I've never envied, in my whole life, people who did something really good, something really "completed": I CHERISH mastering, but I've got lots a probs with cold reasoning.

My "music" examples were about people who "went the extra mile", and who didn't mind if the financial outcome was on par - hence my departure with Vidgen in that competition and the same Vidgen later on, trying to "collect". Some months ago, I tried to convince "kinook", the people / man behind Ultra Recall, that "doing better" was to give him real financial benefits, when in fact, I don't really know about this.

Truths is, the "financial returns" aspect in programming doesn't interst me that much: As soon as you can make your living / survive with programming, you've got all your chances

TO MAKE PROGRAMMING AN ART.

-clean

Unfortunately art like life isn't fair too.

The reason some people can drop the financial outcome is because others (in society, in an economy, government, culture) are filling enough of their financial needs to live.

If artists have to hunt for food, they would have less time to do art.

That holds true too for a decent outliner. A decent outliner who can't outlaw the law and protect itself is not as decent as it claims to be. See my previous example.

You need threats to create excellence and you need threats to that excellence to better hone your outliner to be decent enough "against the unfair world".

A programmer who can't see the dangers of losing data won't develop better backup features or cross-platform or online sync.

This is just the tip of the iceberg too. Any artist have a responsibility to their art, to better know what would threaten their art.

It is not that this responsibility disappears but in a more developed country, institutions form structure that shield you from one vulnerability and over time expose you to their vulnerability. You simply can't hone and create great ideas without being under fire. You can only have someone do the menial work for the artist so the artist can fully offer his greatness to the world. That's how it has always been in the real world of the underdogs.

Those destined to fulfill great software are not born to conceive solutions, they are born to receive greater problems and conceive greater methods to survive against those problems. Over time, some slick salesman or marketing manager or opportunistic youngster will paint it as solutions but in truth there is no true solution that is ever attempted in this world that solves. It all starts with problems and greater problems and one time or the other someone builds a "solution" built to withstand all the incoming threats until it too passes away in myths, hero worship, brand personalities, etc.

Everything else is just Hollywood and lesser hollywood known as "His" "story" i.e. the story of the descendants of the winner.

And Paul, you're of my kind: We're some some people who try to be helpful to this world. We're one of a kind, when most people deciced to be nourrish their family. I can't even blame them, but then, I've got the right to be deeply disappointed with the way of this world I so much would like to improve. And to hell with cynics on outlinersoftware.com.

-clean

Thanks for the compliment but I'm not your kind.

I haven't given my soul to learning how to code, I haven't had any "fast assimilation" of anything. Software, hardware, etc.

Maybe the length of my posts give that illusion but even a slow turtle can't be compared to a moss covered rock. One of them will move on, the other will always be stuck.

You're also mistaken by saying I want to help the world. I can't even help myself.

I don't work towards helping the world. I work to survive and at times I receive a form of vanity or a form of psychological irrationality in which I'll do one of the following thanks to my cognitive blindness and bias:

- Discuss and then maybe get trapped into the illusion of arguing with someone because I want to communicate

- Want to communicate because someone is wrong on the internet

- Desire confirmation bias because I wasn't passionate enough in helping myself secure and realize the validity of my own ideas

- Desire contradicting opinions because I want someone to do all the work at pointing all the holes in my opinion

- Post a thread in a forum I've registered to because I'm too lazy to register to a new forum

- Share something because the act can fill me with dopamine

- Help someone because being registered to a group blinds my brain into forming an ingroup fallacy where I have to reciprocate my desire back to the group

The lists and the reasons go on and on and truth be told, I don't know any of this stuff besides what's often written in pop psychology but I know enough of myself to know that I don't spend the entire days of my life maximizing and optimizing a way to help the world, help part of the world, help my country, help part of my country, help people in my region. I don't even spend seconds thinking how to help the woman I love the most.

I'm just not that person and I apologize for whatever it is I wrote that gave you that false idea.