- Self

codesamurai- October 2nd, 2013
How others see us and how we see ourselves are usually very different. It varies based on how different your childhood was from the typical. For example, my friends from the FBM, who I actually thought knew me, had a very very different view of me from reality.
I spoke to them yesterday and they thought I was this bookish intellectual that uses everything I read in books and believe them absolutely. Probably a deep seeded assumption that came from the almost messiah-like ring leader, Ramone. I will be the first to admit that my academic memory is really really really shitty. I even got a failing mark in Filipino of all subjects, actual failure 73% not that imaginary below 85% that good students are disappointed by. And I couldn't even memorize the list of China's dynasty even if my life depended on it. But I can remember the emotional moments in my life almost perfectly, with some details that are wrong here or there. And I'm really good at playing video games.
Well I can't blame their assumption, I encouraged and never challenged it. I brought books to work, read books on transit. It must seem to them that my life is just centered on books. Books are my way of compensating for my lack of real world knowledge, I mean how the hell would you know how it felt to invent the first computer or to figure out how hellish it was to make an operating system. You will never know unless you were really there. And I have great difficulty trusting mentor figures.
I also have trust issues against strangers and people who have strong unsubstantiated opinions (and of course, old people who seem weird). Given my trust issue, I would need a reference to gauge who's being shitty from those who actually knows what they're doing. The way I see it there are two ways to approach a problem, a disciplined approach and brute force. People who work in Software Engineering, needs the disciplined approach and there are already established ways of approaching each and every engineering task. Applying brute-force or learning-on-the-job in Engineering is just wasteful, the objective is results not discovery. They saw me applying disciplined approach, which I learned from a book because no school here teaches this sort of stuff, and they thought I was being bookish. I was just doing what engineers do, engineer a product with sound engineering methods. Just because I recently learned it doesn't mean I'm bookish, it's just that I don't subscribe to learning-on-the-job-without-a-mentor brute force approach. I'm not sure if I'm being clear here.
My idea was, shit we don't know what the fuck we're doing and our boss is just blaming us because we're making shit. Why not look to the states and find methods that work. Of course I can't ship international consultants to our company to guide us in our work, the next best thing is to consume the capsule of their work in the form of well edited and well reviewed books. My approach is generally to try an approach and see if it works and tweak it a little each time until it is tuned. Or to throw it away if it cannot be tweaked. My approach would generally evolve outside of what was described in the books as our experience grows. But alas, when you're challenging the status quo (in this case: OUR FOREIGN MASTERS KNOW BEST, WE ARE JUST SLAVES THAT CARRY OUT ORDERS) you become a revolutionary. People find the smallest gap in your experience and magnify that fault. Yeah, it might be all fame and glory after a successful revolution but it is always an uphill battle.
The short gist is I mostly read technical books because I don't want to use brute force on anything.