That's the third type actually. But for some reason GP decided to qualify each type as either smart or dumb. Here's put better: there's 3 types of people: those who resist hype, those who profit off of it, and those who enjoy it.
Exactly, and since it's good to profit, and it's good to have fun, surely it's the smart people who are doing that, and the dumb people who are resisting.
I certainly feel dumb for dismissing crypto as only an effective store of value with some minor improvements over the status quo (and some downsides) without considering the implications.
I imagine that the people who profit off of it enjoy it too, though? So perhaps we have a “hype enjoyers” superset that includes “profiteers” and “suckers”, but then we need “neutrals” or something to describe those who enjoy it without making or losing money. And then from there …
I’ll do whatever shit the industry wants me to do, I don’t particularly care if it’s dumb. I mean, it doesn’t FEEL great to work on dumb things, but at the end of the day, I’m around to help implement whatever the paycheck writer wants to see. I genuinely don’t mean that negatively either, I feel like I’m just describing… employment?
Software just isn’t a core part of my identity. I like building it, I like most of the other people who write it, and I like most/some of the people paying me to build it. When I’m done for the day, I very much stop thinking about it (not counting shower thoughts and whatnot on deeper problems)
So what if I end up fixing slop code from AI hype in a couple years? I have been cleaning up slop code from other people for 15 years. I am painfully aware of slop I left for others to deal with too (sorry).
So yeah anyway, your comment resonated. Hype is annoying, but if it sticks around and becomes dominant, my point is, whatever, okay, new thing to learn.
The first type of person already agrees with you. The second type knows but doesn't care. The third isn't going to read this article.