At social gatherings, I have heard someone or another describe himself as an “amateur mathematician”. Whenever I hear that appellation, my mind instantly say, “Um, that sounds dangerous, like being an amateur neurosurgeon”.
@darkuncle@skewray 👍 Everyone should have a narrow, deep knowledge base in a few things and a broad, not-so-deep base in many things. That small, but deep, base then provides not only the sustenance for life but also the life philosophy. And that enthusiasm for a broad spread into many areas enables one to glean wisdom from others’ experiences and perspectives.
@darkuncle@skewray Ya know mate, back in the early 80s, most CS-trained programmers were “generalists”, simply because general, system programming was a “specialist” domain. That broad-based, general exposure was particularly valuable to young practitioners who, as specialists in later careers, can draw from a mass of past experiences.
Today, those who portray themselves as broad-based practitioners use the label “full-stack”—yeah, web only; go figure.
Once, on behalf of a client, I interviewed a tech lead candidate, who touted himself as a “one-stop shop”, “know everything expert” in all things systems design and development. I always start interviews by asking questions with easy, simple answers, so as to acclimate the candidate to the process and to establish a rapport with him. Given the system-oriented nature of the work, I asked this senior-level candidate to describe at a high level how a computer boots up, willing to accept even a hand-wavy response, so as to move the process along. I got a blank stare.🤦♂️
@AmenZwa@skewray I have thought about this a lot over the last 10 to 15 years; in defense of the new generation, the scope of technology in the world is so much broader than it was 25 or 30 years ago that I’m not sure it is still possible to be a generalist in the same way that those of us who started in the 80s or 90s had to be out of necessity