Deteriorated copies spread
- If there is something of value X and an inferior copy of it is possible, then over time a degraded copy of it is made and the boundaries of concept X are expanded
- The degraded copies reach the "Shoeshine boy" who does not actively acquire information first.
- So Observation coverage issues lowers the value of X
- This is Pessimistic Misconceptions, underestimating the value of X, so they don't want to read the original source of X and can't recognize the mistake
relevance - Usefulness of the classics - A good book X written by a smart person is copied all over the place by people of a later time period, degrading it. - People who can't compete on the merits of their content put their name out there as a foil, saying, "It's written in that famous X." - People who read only a degraded copy without reading the original will misunderstand and say, "What a big deal. - self-development - Self-help used to mean good. - More scammers are taking money by offering degraded copies of self-help. - As a result, more and more people see "self-help" itself in a bad light.
@nishio: the "person with a high level of consciousness" concept, I felt it was a kind of this after all
- narrow-minded
- when there is a legal tender currency, bad money drives out good money (Gresham's Law)
- Mass production due to low production costs of bad "degraded copies"
- Good content" is expensive to produce.
- It is not reasonable to put out good content in a place where good content and degraded copies are equated, so good content will not appear in such a place.
- A minority is a majority among those who observe only a minority.
- Just because there are a lot of buggy programs out there doesn't make being buggy right.
- A not-so-nice phrase, but simpler: "More idiots don't make the idiots right."
- There are simply too many idiots.
kmizu I don't know what you mean when you say that "there are a lot of people who promote object orientation who are kind of stinkers," but I've seen Fowler, Eric Gamma, Joshua Brock, and a lot of others. I've seen the discourse of Fowler, Eric Gamma, Joshua Block, and many others, and I think those who are considered "big names in the object-oriented field" in the English-speaking world are generally "sane. ......
kmizu By the way, object orientation is a methodology (or some kind of framework), and at least no sane researcher should have ever called themselves a "science". So, the perception of those who criticize it as pseudo-science is itself off.
Also, there seems to be an assumption among such people that if it's not science, it's worthless.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/劣化コピーが広がる using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I'm very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.