Taking a bit from sociolinguistics. It irks me quite a bit how technologists will sometimes use jargon as a form of linguistic discrimination. It's bothersome with the debates on definitions and it alienates others (especially business side stakeholders) from the discourse.
I find that those who are proficient in the tech sociolect are included in the conversation, while those who are not are excluded.
It would all behoove us to get on with it and actually do something with technology to help people vs. talk about it. (The irony is not lost on me regarding my own comments.)
I see it a bit differently. To make my point, I'll describe several groups we all likely belong to at different times.
First are the innovators, who encounter a problem and design a practical solution. Then come the academics, who study that solution, write about it, and establish formal definitions.
Next, entrepreneurs monetize the solution, often expanding the definitions with marketing language. They partner with consultants, who then teach these frameworks to leaders. Leaders, driven by a fear of falling behind, urge their teams—the practitioners—to apply these packaged solutions to new problems.
This is precisely where clear definitions become critical. Practitioners need a shared, precise vocabulary to verify that a solution truly fits the specific use case.
Personally, I love to innovate. Give me a problem and I want to shut the door and solve it. But what is perceived as the biggest challenges will always invite collaboration and this is where common definitions are imperative.
the challenge is when definitions already exist, yet people still continue to bicker about them. The juice ain't worth the squeeze, especially when there are major problems to be solved in the world. This is a massive waste of time and a disgrace to our profession.
Thanks for drawing attention to this discussion! I think it time for a new cage match on semantic layers and semantics in given unstructured data!! Bring it! lol
Yes. I think this behavior is the evil twin of marketing jargon, where relatively simple tech is wrapped in mysterious wording for a flashy effect. It’s very easy to show off.
The Pedantic Layer…haha. A person who debates a word definition, gets concurrence, and nothing else is done because does “not” understand the intent of the discussion.
Sometime I think data just attracts a certain kind of mind; the kind that likes to argue over sports rankings or how to properly interpret DnD rules or the best wood working techniques. Whatever they are into, they take joy in arguing over the minutiae but also can't recognize it as joy and instead feel frustrated.
I recently got called out on Linkedin by someone whos profile photo is a stone statue of a horse for not knowing anything about data because I used the phrase "ELT" in a meme
Word.
Taking a bit from sociolinguistics. It irks me quite a bit how technologists will sometimes use jargon as a form of linguistic discrimination. It's bothersome with the debates on definitions and it alienates others (especially business side stakeholders) from the discourse.
I find that those who are proficient in the tech sociolect are included in the conversation, while those who are not are excluded.
It would all behoove us to get on with it and actually do something with technology to help people vs. talk about it. (The irony is not lost on me regarding my own comments.)
I see it a bit differently. To make my point, I'll describe several groups we all likely belong to at different times.
First are the innovators, who encounter a problem and design a practical solution. Then come the academics, who study that solution, write about it, and establish formal definitions.
Next, entrepreneurs monetize the solution, often expanding the definitions with marketing language. They partner with consultants, who then teach these frameworks to leaders. Leaders, driven by a fear of falling behind, urge their teams—the practitioners—to apply these packaged solutions to new problems.
This is precisely where clear definitions become critical. Practitioners need a shared, precise vocabulary to verify that a solution truly fits the specific use case.
Personally, I love to innovate. Give me a problem and I want to shut the door and solve it. But what is perceived as the biggest challenges will always invite collaboration and this is where common definitions are imperative.
the challenge is when definitions already exist, yet people still continue to bicker about them. The juice ain't worth the squeeze, especially when there are major problems to be solved in the world. This is a massive waste of time and a disgrace to our profession.
Thanks for drawing attention to this discussion! I think it time for a new cage match on semantic layers and semantics in given unstructured data!! Bring it! lol
Yes. I think this behavior is the evil twin of marketing jargon, where relatively simple tech is wrapped in mysterious wording for a flashy effect. It’s very easy to show off.
The Pedantic Layer…haha. A person who debates a word definition, gets concurrence, and nothing else is done because does “not” understand the intent of the discussion.
I just love the idea that something supposedly “critical” is going to be solved in the comments section of a random LinkedIn post
Sometime I think data just attracts a certain kind of mind; the kind that likes to argue over sports rankings or how to properly interpret DnD rules or the best wood working techniques. Whatever they are into, they take joy in arguing over the minutiae but also can't recognize it as joy and instead feel frustrated.
My +3 Boots of Striking disagree
I recently got called out on Linkedin by someone whos profile photo is a stone statue of a horse for not knowing anything about data because I used the phrase "ELT" in a meme
That horse has called me out too, haha. It’s a Way to get attention…
sorry acronym
I will comit seppuku at dawn
Other topics that MUST BE EXPLORED (why am I shouting?)
- is JSON pronounced Jay-sonn or Jay-son?
- is SQL sequel or ess-Q-Elle?
- is data day-ta (the correct answer) or dat-ta (incorrect)
Inquiring minds want to know (I want to know) where my genexers at