The imp of the perverse

[jbv]

Alain,

I'm not trying to flame you in front of everyone, but
just trying to make a few points.

> Hello,
>
> > I forgot 1 thing : according to Konrad Lorenz
> > works, AFAIR a baby goose (not sure it's been
> > proven for ducks as well) bonds to whatever
> > MOVING thing is the first it sees.
>
> Goose instead of duck, and first *moving* object
> instead of just the first object. Okay. Fair enough. I
> was a bit inaccurate, but happily my main point about
> 'imprinting' was clearly grasped despite my inability
> to remember the term. A qualified success!

Well, a success in informal conversations on a
barbeQ day, probably...
But not from a scientific point of view, on purpose
of producing valid & reproductible / re-usable results,
certainly not...
IMHO by explicitly referring to "imprint" you moved
the discussion to much more serious & scientific
territories...

And BTW this topic has *nothing* to do with biology :
it's about animal psychology (imprint) and ergonomics.
Several years of scientific research in ergonomics has
lead to strong concepts and applications (the Mac GUI
for instance).
In the mid 80's, I was working on a thesis in ergonomics
about design of computer interfaces for music software.
And AFAIR concepts involved were completly different :
one would consider mental representations of musical
objects, memorization of structures, task strategies,
beginners vs experienced users, etc.

Again, the concept of "imprint" has nothing to do with
computing or learning of programming.
And BTW, where would it lead ? If "imprit" applied to
computing and/or prog. language learning, how could
it help improving GUIs ergonomics or building languages
with a less steep learning curve (for instance) ?

AFAIK, babies goose don't modify their imprint as
they get more experienced. I remember an experience
by Konrad Lorenz in the 30's (no, I wasn't born yet,
I read it    ;-) ) : he used to wave a piece of cardboard
in front of newly born babies geese who would immediately
consider it as their mother, since it was the first moving
object they ever saw.
But as they grew older, they still considered that piece of
cardboard as their mother. And for one good reason : these
geese are somehow "programmed" to get imprint from
the first moving object as soon as they get out of the egg.
They simply have no choice.
Is it how you consider all programmers on this list ?

I'm afraid it's too late (after a 12 hrs day of work) to
continue this discussion... But anyway I guess you see
my point...

Take care,
JB

>
>
> > I'm not sure if this concept called "imprint"
> > can be extended to learning of programming
> > languages...
>
> OTC, it does apply. The responses to my post about
> this unanimously confirmed this 'hypothesis' of mine.
> I did not invent it actually. Many folks have
> expressed this, verbally as well as in writing. It's
> part of the lore of computing culture. Notice btw that
> I have switched from "programming" to "computing",
> implying that imprinting also applies to what OS we
> prefer to use. Die-hard Win fans don't spontaneously
> favour Mac even though the Mac is 'arguably' better,
> for example.
>
> > I agree, this is way OT, but anyway, jumping
> > from one concept to another just like that is
> > not recommended...
>
> I am not a biologist, or anything like that, so I am
> sorry if my *ANALOGY* to imprinting [among geese] has
> somehow ruffled a few feathers. My point is that
> humans tend to favour the *first*
> platform/language/etc that they become familiar with.
> Switching to something else which is UN-familiar tends
> therefore to be resisted by most of us.
>
> Sorry for the OT everyone,
>
> Alain
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
> http://search.yahoo.com
> _______________________________________________
> metacard mailing list
> metacard at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/metacard