"Separating hype from quality takes time" - yeah, but at the same time if you do go by the quality of experience and learning, there's no harm in being part of the process that separates hype from quality. If all you care about is the grind of delivering someone else's ideas, sure ... you can get by on letting others be at the forefront of a new technology.
It's a risk, sure, to get involved with something that burns out as a hype but if you're a technologist then even that has a positive spin since if you do it often enough, you already have what it takes to not be tied down on a particular 'thing'.
Definitely this is by far the best generally valid advice, everyone should create their own overhyped tech nonsense, disregard what anyone else is doing unless someone else validates it first and happily live in their own bubble which they rule. If presidents can do it, so can everyone else.
"Separating hype from quality takes time" - yeah, but at the same time if you do go by the quality of experience and learning, there's no harm in being part of the process that separates hype from quality. If all you care about is the grind of delivering someone else's ideas, sure ... you can get by on letting others be at the forefront of a new technology.
It's a risk, sure, to get involved with something that burns out as a hype but if you're a technologist then even that has a positive spin since if you do it often enough, you already have what it takes to not be tied down on a particular 'thing'.
I'd rather spend my time creating my own overhyped nonsense instead of figuring out what other overhyped nonsense is any good.
Definitely this is by far the best generally valid advice, everyone should create their own overhyped tech nonsense, disregard what anyone else is doing unless someone else validates it first and happily live in their own bubble which they rule. If presidents can do it, so can everyone else.
You forgot /s
Yeah, I hate it when that happens ;)