Most software today is very much like an Egyptian pyramid with millions of bricks piled on top of each other, with no structural integrity, but just done by brute force and thousands of slaves.
Our growing ability to eliminate the slow-moving aspects of entertainment and go hopping from one peak to another is not without cost. Stand-up comics, movie-makers and others who earn their living entertaining no longer "waste" time with setups and plot development, lest we reach for the remote and click them off our screen. The result is a loss of subtlety, anticipation and nuance and, in the process, a coarsening of our discourse.
Interpretation
What this quote means
The quote highlights how the rapid consumption of entertainment has led to a decline in storytelling quality and depth.
William Raspberry points out that as our ability to access instant entertainment increases, creators feel pressured to forgo the rich elements of storytelling, such as setups and plot development, to keep audiences engaged. This shift results in a superficial experience where the subtleties and nuances essential for deep understanding and appreciation of art and storytelling are lost, ultimately affecting the quality of communication and discourse in society.
Themes
In practice
Example use cases
In a discussion about modern media consumption, this quote illustrates the consequences of quick entertainment.
Similar quotes
Software patents, in particular, are very ripe for abuse. The whole system encourages big corporations getting thousands and thousands of patents. Individuals almost never get them.
We’re keenly aware that when we develop and make something and bring it to market that it really does speak to a set of values. And what preoccupies us is that sense of care, and what our products will not speak to is a schedule, what our products will not speak to is trying to respond to some corporate or competitive agenda. We’re very genuinely designing the best products that we can for people.
There are no secrets on an successful software project. Both good and bad news must be able to move up and down the ptoject hierarchy without restriction.
The problem with the Internet is that it gives you everything - reliable material and crazy material. So the problem becomes, how do you discriminate?
What I do instead is I will cheerfully spend literally hours on identifier names: variable names, method names, and so forth, to make my code readable. If you read some expression using these identifiers and it reads like an English sentence, your program is much more likely to be correct, and much easier to maintain.