StackOverflow

[Dioxin 29]

Disclaimer: I don't recommend you start asking questions on the site until you are familiar with how it works. It tends to be the reason why people dislike StackOverflow - they ask a question that's not on-topic for the site, then cry when they get bad feedback. Use the site properly and you'll realize it's true potential. This post does not encourage you to ask/answer questions, rather than use it as a tool for discovery.

 

Not only has StackOverflow helped me improve my coding standards, but it has made me realize that it's easy to ask the wrong questions.

 

For anyone attempting to improve their skill, I highly recommend scoping around the site. Here is my account for anyone interested in checking out my questions/answers in hopes to learn something new.

 

Exploring tags is an easy way to learn about new subjects. Each tag has a description of what that subject is about. Set the filter to "most votes" to get some insight on aspects people found most interesting/useful.

 

StackOverflow is for specific programming problems ("Why does my heap usage exceed what is expected?").

Programmers is for general development questions ("Whats the difference between pointers and references?").

CodeReview is exactly what it sounds like (post your working application to get a review - the code must all be there, allowing reviewers to run it).

Computer Science is for the more theoretical topics ("Why do we use object orientation?").

 

Hope some of you find this info useful. I know there are a couple people out there who dislike StackOverflow. Simply ignore them and look into it for yourself, making your own judgement

[Explicit 213]

The reason I have such an issue with StackOverflow is because the majority of answers either 1) spread misinformation (which normally comes to light within the comments but the majority of people don't even read those) 2) complain about how the question is stupid and give an irrelevant answer or 3) reference a library. Obviously this doesn't apply to EVERY question but lately I've found myself finding much more reliable and in depth answers on blogging sites.

 

By the way, what's your StackOverflow profile? Unless you're Jon Skeet I'm not going to be impressed.

[Dioxin 29]

The reason I have such an issue with StackOverflow is because the majority of answers either 1) spread misinformation (which normally comes to light within the comments but the majority of people don't even read those) 2) complain about how the question is stupid and give an irrelevant answer or 3) reference a library. Obviously this doesn't apply to EVERY question but lately I've found myself finding much more reliable and in depth answers on blogging sites.

 

By the way, what's your StackOverflow profile? Unless you're Jon Skeet I'm not going to be impressed.

Wanna give me a good example of #1 and #2? Cause if you ask me, I haven't seen any misinformation being accepted on that site. Not to mention, you're not really one to talk about spreading misinfo, no offense..

 

Stupid questions only come from people who refuse to learn how the site works before actually using it. Usually, "stupid questions" are duplicates, off-topic or show no research effort.

 

Referencing libraries is not a bad thing at all. It's a way to say "hey, don't re-invent the wheel". If an answer contains a library suggestion, and it's not what you're looking for, simply request for a non-lib answer.

 

Jon Skeet is not as impressive as he looks.. If you dig into his history, he's more interested in things like timing mechanisms rather than anything else (including design). The reason he has so much rep is because his older questions keep gaining more rep. He was an early bird who got the worm. There are MANY other greats on there, who some may not have that much rep (such as the creator of Maven, the creator of TestNG, Oracle employees such as Brian Goetz, ect...).

[Explicit 213]

Wanna give me a good example of #1 and #2? Cause if you ask me, I haven't seen any misinformation being accepted on that site. Not to mention, you're not really one to talk about spreading misinfo, no offense..

 

Stupid questions only come from people who refuse to learn how the site works before actually using it. Usually, "stupid questions" are duplicates, off-topic or show no research effort.

 

Referencing libraries is not a bad thing at all. It's a way to say "hey, don't re-invent the wheel". If an answer contains a library suggestion, and it's not what you're looking for, simply request for a non-lib answer.

 

Jon Skeet is not as impressive as he looks.. If you dig into his history, he's more interested in things like timing mechanisms rather than anything else (including design). The reason he has so much rep is because his older questions keep gaining more rep. He was an early bird who got the worm. There are MANY other greats on there, who some may not have that much rep (such as the creator of Maven, the creator of TestNG, Oracle employees such as Brian Goetz, ect...).

I've spread no misinformation? The only thing you've quoted me on thus far have been opinions. Like I've stated before, not all of us care about sacrificing readability to shave a few nanoseconds off our execution times.

 

I actually saved this to send to people who try to talk cryptography but lack all knowledge of it (literally spoken to self proclaimed cryptographers who couldn't explain the difference between block and stream ciphers). Viewed over a hundred thousand times with an accepted answer that states "This size of the IV (in bytes) must = (keysize / 8)". You can't get much worse than that (see the comment by jbtule).

 

I'm not saying it's bad, I prefer to use libraries over creating redundant code, but it seems to be the goto answer even when questions explicitly state libraries are out of the question.

 

Oh I know other people exist like Jon Skeet, his name just came to mind first.

 

Basically me and you just have a difference of opinion regarding programming in general. You're concerned with implementation while I just care about producing something effective as quick as possible. As I assume you're relatively new to the RS hacking world I'm going to guess you don't know someone who goes by the name of Ian C? You and him would probably be best buds.

[Dioxin 29]

I've spread no misinformation? The only thing you've quoted me on thus far have been opinions. Like I've stated before, not all of us care about sacrificing readability to shave a few nanoseconds off our execution times.

 

I actually saved this to send to people who try to talk cryptography but lack all knowledge of it (literally spoken to self proclaimed cryptographers who couldn't explain the difference between block and stream ciphers). Viewed over a hundred thousand times with an accepted answer that states "This size of the IV (in bytes) must = (keysize / 8)". You can't get much worse than that (see the comment by jbtule).

 

I'm not saying it's bad, I prefer to use libraries over creating redundant code, but it seems to be the goto answer even when questions explicitly state libraries are out of the question.

 

Oh I know other people exist like Jon Skeet, his name just came to mind first.

 

Basically me and you just have a difference of opinion regarding programming in general. You're concerned with implementation while I just care about producing something effective as quick as possible. As I assume you're relatively new to the RS hacking world I'm going to guess you don't know someone who goes by the name of Ian C? You and him would probably be best buds.

They weren't opinions: "the few milliseconds it takes to preform an empty check on the object versus just a reference check adds up a hella lot." :: "Lambdas really aren't a big change tbh, .... The only difference is syntax" and this is just what I've seen. I'm sure if I scoped around your profiles I'd find more. The point is, you'd rather bring someone down than try to debate. All I ask for is to back up statements with documentation.. But really, if you wanna go on about this, do it in a PM please.

 

Nice, you got me there with the link. But the ratio of misinformation to correct information is staggering, in favor for correct info. Keep in mind that StackOverflow is to get help with specific programming problems, and the people answering may not be the most experienced in that subject. But obviously it helped out 200+ people, so you gotta give some credit. If you want top-notch security info, there's a site for that. There's a reason why StackExchange allows just about anyone to edit/comment/answer; improve on the subject if it's not correct.

 

Even thought you found a needle in the haystack, you're still using one of the comments as a reference. Someone had better information, so they shared it. Others agreed, it got anchored to the top. I'm not saying study the site like a bible, rather than use it as a tool for discovery. There are tons of different subjects discussed on these sites, some of which you've never heard before. I'm sure you've heard of code golf, where people tend to use both regular and esoteric languages to create tiny creative programs. It's a fun way to discover new things, as with all these sites. You could then do some independent studies on whatever you find interesting. I like to think discovery is 70% of the process of mastering a subject, seeing how you can't master it if you don't know it. Seeing how StackOverflow exposes a ton of subjects, it's a great vehicle for learning.

[Explicit 213]

They weren't opinions: "the few milliseconds it takes to preform an empty check on the object versus just a reference check adds up a hella lot." :: "Lambdas really aren't a big change tbh, .... The only difference is syntax" and this is just what I've seen. I'm sure if I scoped around your profiles I'd find more. The point is, you'd rather bring someone down than try to debate. All I ask for is to back up statements with documentation.. But really, if you wanna go on about this, do it in a PM please.

 

Nice, you got me there with the link. But the ratio of misinformation to correct information is staggering, in favor for correct info. Keep in mind that StackOverflow is to get help with specific programming problems, and the people answering may not be the most experienced in that subject. But obviously it helped out 200+ people, so you gotta give some credit. If you want top-notch security info, there's a site for that. There's a reason why StackExchange allows just about anyone to edit/comment/answer; improve on the subject if it's not correct.

 

Even thought you found a needle in the haystack, you're still using one of the comments as a reference. Someone had better information, so they shared it. Others agreed, it got anchored to the top. I'm not saying study the site like a bible, rather than use it as a tool for discovery. There are tons of different subjects discussed on these sites, some of which you've never heard before. I'm sure you've heard of code golf, where people tend to use both regular and esoteric languages to create tiny creative programs. It's a fun way to discover new things, as with all these sites. You could then do some independent studies on whatever you find interesting. I like to think discovery is 70% of the process of mastering a subject, seeing how you can't master it if you don't know it. Seeing how StackOverflow exposes a ton of subjects, it's a great vehicle for learning.

Scoping around my profiles? Damn, didn't know I interested you that much. Not a single one of my explanations contained ad hominem attacks so I'm not exactly sure why you see me as a "hater rather than debater". If something I say offends you that's not my problem.

 

StackOverflow is far from a terrible resource, it's one of the most visited sites in the world for a reason, but I personally have become more productive staying away from it.

[Dioxin 29]

Scoping around my profiles? Damn, didn't know I interested you that much. Not a single one of my explanations contained ad hominem attacks so I'm not exactly sure why you see me as a "hater rather than debater". If something I say offends you that's not my problem.

 

StackOverflow is far from a terrible resource, it's one of the most visited sites in the world for a reason, but I personally have become more productive staying away from it.

Explains why you're so smart, eh?

 

If you dislike StackOverflow, that's your choice. But you should at least have a good reason. I know many people who dislike it due to it's rise in popularity, bringing a lot of trash to the site due to people not reading the rules. That's understandable. But saying you are more productive without it suggests it somehow impacts your productivity negativly. I don't possibly see how, as it has a ton to offer, so it would be nice if you got me on the same page.

[CodeNinja 32]

The reason I have such an issue with StackOverflow is because the majority of answers either 1) spread misinformation (which normally comes to light within the comments but the majority of people don't even read those) 2) complain about how the question is stupid and give an irrelevant answer or 3) reference a library. Obviously this doesn't apply to EVERY question but lately I've found myself finding much more reliable and in depth answers on blogging sites.

 

By the way, what's your StackOverflow profile? Unless you're Jon Skeet I'm not going to be impressed.

[Dioxin 29]

 

The reason I have such an issue with StackOverflow is because the majority of answers either 1) spread misinformation (which normally comes to light within the comments but the majority of people don't even read those) 2) complain about how the question is stupid and give an irrelevant answer or 3) reference a library. Obviously this doesn't apply to EVERY question but lately I've found myself finding much more reliable and in depth answers on blogging sites.

 

By the way, what's your StackOverflow profile? Unless you're Jon Skeet I'm not going to be impressed.

 

He found 1 answer that spread misinformation. And it's not like he found it right off the bat. He's been keeping it as a reference, probably due to the rarity of accepted misinformation.

 

If you have your own opinion on the site, feel free to share it.

[Explicit 213]

He found 1 answer that spread misinformation. And it's not like he found it right off the bat. He's been keeping it as a reference, probably due to the rarity of accepted misinformation.

 

If you have your own opinion on the site, feel free to share it.

Both of us did and you took offense. Not our problem.