User:Cone/famous

Here's a list of famous and not-so-famous people that are important to me. And my opinion on their types, of course.

Not-so-famous people

Joel Spolsky

My typing is LSE. Software business owner and blogger who is currently quite a figure in the software engineering field. His most famous contribution is the Stack Overflow website, an extremely popular Q&A-type repository for programming knowledge which is very well-known among programmers everywhere.

Joel Spolsky's blog focuses primarily on the effectiveness/ineffectiveness of various software practices, and he can be highly critical of "stupid" decisions and business failures. He has countless posts about effective methods for achieving things relevant to programmers/managers/etc., as well as covering bad methods. Productivity is also greatly emphasized, and he has a great affinity for "duct tape programmers"--those programmers who just "get things done" (another phrase he is fond of) without succumbing to overengineering, concern for "perfect" solutions, or anything else that is not directly relevant to the goal at hand.

He built his company sort of as an experiment to show that programmers can enjoy their work and still get things done.

(not exactly done, just wanted to put this up)

Derrick Jensen

My typing is EII. Writer and activist most known for his books on anti-civilization (the idea that civilization is inherently unnatural and maladaptive and should be removed from human experience completely.) Looks a lot like Ralph Nader and plays pretty much the same role in the anti-civ community. In fact, Rick's own comments about Ralph Nader can pretty much apply verbatim for him, with some content changed:

Social conscience of the anti-civ community. Focuses on the psychology of civilization, abusive relationships, and inaction. Highly principled. Conveys a sense of physical frailty along with moral courage that only makes him a more convincing protector of weak individuals and small groups against the morally bankrupt big-business interests of the world.

In his books, his communication style is very personal and sensitive. Is very brave in being completely emotionally honest about his own abusive childhood and uses those experiences to draw parallels between abuse and civilization. Morally courageous and not afraid to state what he feels is right and wrong. Tries to get the reader to sympathize with the victims of the ills of civilization and instill a sense of moral certitude. Never becomes detached from his feelings toward what he is talking about and is consistent in them the whole way through his books. His books have little semblance of structure and will jump from one topic to the next, often in a way where he'll analyze a few different concepts from many different angles. The concepts in one book "evolve" as you read them, if that makes sense.

I used to think that he was some sort of Beta quadra type, due to my perception of his personal forum as having a predominately Beta atmosphere (although that forum is semi-private, so you couldn't really be able to verify that.) But looking at him closer, and after having my perception of Fi become clearer, I think this typing makes a lot of sense.