Skills (things I'm good at):
I'm basically a C-programmer, but of course also familiar with a lot of
other programming languages (from C++, Smalltalk and Lisp to assembly
programming). I think that the logic behind a program, and the skill of
desiging a program in a clear and maintainable way, are much more
important than being a guru in the details of one specific programming
I'm more a mathematician than a technologist, and better at logical
designing of a piece of technology than at knowing the details of how to
use and/or install a given existing kind of technology.
I think that writing clear and useful manuals might be a more essential
and more useful skill than being a good coder.
- technical writing:
I'm good at writing any type of ``manual'' that is intended to convey to
the reader the outline of the functionality (the logic, the
``mathematics'') behind how a piece of software (or mathematical method,
or even a philosophical method or tool) works internally.
I regard technical writing, scientific writing, and philosophical
writing as basically the same thing. In each, conveying insight
is in my opinion the important thing. A text should give the reader the
insight that enables him to use a tool (a piece of technology) or a
method (a philosophical method of thinking) fully independently to his
own advantage, and should fully give all the essential ``secrets''
behind why and how it works, so that an intelligent reader is thereby
e.g. enabled to build on to it.
I think that an idea that is not communicated into the world, or at
least into a group of people who actually use the idea, is almost as
good as dead. To communicate and document an idea is in my opinion a
vital part of the process of generating the idea.
- analysis and design:
I have a significant need to puzzle out any kind of design problem,
whether in software, mathematics, designing of a piece of technology,
designing of a philosophical method of thinking, or whatever. In
everything, I only look at the functionality behind things, I disregard
and try to eliminate anything that is not functional (= useful). I have
a tendency to hang on as a leech onto any problem that people give me.
I have a need to make sense of any input data that is given to me (= to
find out ``how it works''), and to solve any puzzle that is given to me,
especially if it is a new kind of puzzle and if it is not a
trivial thing -- e.g. if the solution to the puzzle could involve
finding methods that are generally usable in a wider domain.
What the actual puzzle is that I'm at any given time working on, is to
me much more irrelevant: I do not actively go looking for problems by
myself; I tend to just latch on to anything that happens to come my way
(or that people toss to me).
English and Dutch: fluent.
French, German, Italian: enough to read without difficulty.
(Currently studying Chinese and Japanese ... but those are rather long-term
- cooperational, organizational and communication skills:
I'm not at all a typical practical ``organizer'', but in the domain of
how information flows between people I do have a tendency, and
find it appealing, to organize things; namely in such a way that
repetitive conversations and modes of thinking within groups are broken
open, in such a way that people who might possess information (including
methods and skills) that might be useful to other people are
reciprocally informed of each other, and in such a way that new
possibilities are opened up (e.g. views towards new sorts of
information, new ways of gaining feedback, or any other thing that might
aid information exchange processes).
I regard people as walking (and dynamic) libraries; it is in my opinion
a very useful investment to try to find out, when meeting someone and
also when interacting with people you already know, what unexpected and
of more unique items of content might be in that ``library''.
Things I'm not useful for:
Help-desk and maintenance work.
Anything with frequent tight deadlines.
Any work that requires short-term operational planning and