faazshift wrote:This community is about showing you your resources and sharing knowledge. Its not about giving the answers, but helping you to figure out the answer (or an answer) on your own. Basically community-assisted self-help.
But surely, in the context of a complex programming challenge (in this instance: finding the correct anagram) there is no singular "answer". There are multiple answers, some better than others. That brings me to my original point: collectively, it's likely that we have at least 1 "very good" solution to this problem. This means that, in my opinion, we will have a large number of solutions that are "worse". I'm convinced that almost (if not) all of these "worse" solutions will never be improved upon, simply because very few people will have the motivation to improve something which works good enough. Therefore, by not sharing, it's likely that very few of us will in fact learn anything new.
Your blog post seems to suggest that re-inventing something will automatically make it better, which is in my opinion a semantic misconception about "re-invention". By sharing solutions rather than forcing everyone to re-invent the same thing, we're infinitely more likely to reach a better solution more quickly. If history teaches us anything, it's that a large number of modern day technologies (and evolution as a whole) were not re-invented, they were stolen and improved upon (telephone, radio, ...). Also, your arguments are in complete disregard of time and effort. In an ideal world, theoretically speaking, you're right. Unfortunately, in the real world, all things considered, your "every man for himself" way of thinking will achieve very little and waste a lot.
I realise I'm not going to win any hearts and minds having this discussion, and it may not be the point of this community to share at all, so I'll happily drop it and move on