At the same time, the great minds across the [[wikipedia::English_Channel|English Channel]] created [[empiricism]]; a philosophy where knowledge is preceded by experience. [[wikipedia::David_Hume|David Hume]], [[wikipedia::John_Locke|John Locke]] and others. This school of thought believes that first of all one needs to see, hear and observe things and events happening in the real world and only than one can create proper understanding for reasons and motivations of such events.

At the same time, the great minds across the [[wikipedia::English_Channel|English Channel]] created [[empiricism]]; a philosophy where knowledge is preceded by experience. [[wikipedia::David_Hume|David Hume]], [[wikipedia::John_Locke|John Locke]] and others. This school of thought believes that first of all one needs to see, hear and observe things and events happening in the real world and only than one can create proper understanding for reasons and motivations of such events.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for the future.

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

At the same time, the great minds across the [[wikipedia::English_Channel|English Channel]] created [[empiricism]]; a philosophy where knowledge is preceded by experience. [[wikipedia::David_Hume|David Hume]], [[wikipedia::John_Locke|John Locke]] and others. This school of thought believes that first of all one needs to see, hear and observe things and events happening in the real world and only than one can create proper understanding for reasons and motivations of such events.

At the same time, the great minds across the [[wikipedia::English_Channel|English Channel]] created [[empiricism]]; a philosophy where knowledge is preceded by experience. [[wikipedia::David_Hume|David Hume]], [[wikipedia::John_Locke|John Locke]] and others. This school of thought believes that first of all one needs to see, hear and observe things and events happening in the real world and only than one can create proper understanding for reasons and motivations of such events.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Cluelessness, or rather ''selective cluelessness'' is a kind of life style and programing meta-methodology introduced in [[TheAPIBook]]'s chapter [[The Art of Building Modern Software]].

Cluelessness, or rather ''selective cluelessness'' is a kind of life style and programing meta-methodology introduced in [[TheAPIBook]]'s chapter [[The Art of Building Modern Software]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is [[good]] or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is [[good]]. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is a great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is [[good]] or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is [[good]]. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality. [[Cluelessness]] is a way to measure whether particular design advice is [[Good Advice]] or not.

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality. [[Cluelessness]] is a way to measure whether particular design advice is [[Good Advice]] or not.

Selective [[cluelessness]] is appropriate way to deal with [[Leaky abstractions]] that happen whenever we create an [[API]] (which is an abstraction, a facade over some implementation). Majority of users then deals with the abstraction only. Just ''experts'' affected by leakages need to dig into the leaking details behind such [[API]]. Quality of an [[API]] can then be judged by the ration between those who are [[cluelessness|cluelessly]] OK with the abstraction and those who need to understand more.

Selective [[cluelessness]] is appropriate way to deal with [[Leaky abstractions]] that happen whenever we create an [[API]] (which is an abstraction, a facade over some implementation). Majority of users then deals with the abstraction only. Just ''experts'' affected by leakages need to dig into the leaking details behind such [[API]]. [[Quality]] of an [[API]] can then be judged by the ratio between those who are [[cluelessness|cluelessly]] OK with the abstraction and those who need to understand more.

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is [[good]] or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is [[good]]. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is [[good]] or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is [[good]]. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality. [[Cluelessness]] is a way to measure whether particular design advice is [[Good Advice]] or not.

Selective [[cluelessness]] is appropriate way to deal with [[Leaky abstractions]] that happen whenever we create an [[API]] (which is an abstraction, a facade over some implementation). Majority of users then deals with the abstraction only. Just ''experts'' affected by leakages need to dig into the leaking details behind such [[API]]. Quality of an [[API]] can then be judged by the ration between those who are [[cluelessness|cluelessly]] OK with the abstraction and those who need to understand more.

Selective [[cluelessness]] is appropriate way to deal with [[Leaky abstractions]] that happen whenever we create an [[API]] (which is an abstraction, a facade over some implementation). Majority of users then deals with the abstraction only. Just ''experts'' affected by leakages need to dig into the leaking details behind such [[API]]. Quality of an [[API]] can then be judged by the ration between those who are [[cluelessness|cluelessly]] OK with the abstraction and those who need to understand more.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even more simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

At the same time, the great minds across the [[wikipedia::English_Channel|English Channel]] created [[empiricism]]; a philosophy where knowledge is preceded by experience. [[wikipedia::David_Hume|David Hume]], [[wikipedia::John_Locke|John Locke]] and others. This school of thought believes that first of all one needs to see, hear and observe things and events happening in the real world and only than one can create proper understanding for reasons and motivations of such events.

At the same time, the great minds across the [[wikipedia::English_Channel|English Channel]] created [[empiricism]]; a philosophy where knowledge is preceded by experience. [[wikipedia::David_Hume|David Hume]], [[wikipedia::John_Locke|John Locke]] and others. This school of thought believes that first of all one needs to see, hear and observe things and events happening in the real world and only than one can create proper understanding for reasons and motivations of such events.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the sences, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the senses, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even more simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even more simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Cluelessness, or rather ''selective cluelessness'' is a kind of life style and programing meta-methodology introduced in [[TheAPIBook]]'s chapter [[The Art of Building Modern Software]].

Cluelessness, or rather ''selective cluelessness'' is a kind of life style and programing meta-methodology introduced in [[TheAPIBook]]'s chapter [[The Art of Building Modern Software]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is good or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is good. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is [[good]] or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is [[good]]. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the sences, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Although these two philosophical approaches seem quite contrary to each other, in fact the modern [[wikipedia::Science|science]] managed to marry them together. In fact even [[wikipedia::René_Descartes|René Descartes]] understood the value of scientific [[wikipedia::Experiment|experiment]] to verify or reject a [[wikipedia::Hypothesis|hypothesis]], which is kind of [[Empiricism|empiristic]] approach. Since then the modern science seems to oscillate between the extreme approaches represented by [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]]. This means that sometimes the science seeks beauty and elegance, as that is the necessary sign of [[rationalism]], while sometimes it is satisfied with seeing the ''things to work'' - e.g. satisfy the sences, seen together with [[empiricism]] as the most important source of our understanding, leaving the explanation for future.

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real work is even more simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Yet the approach of majority of people towards understanding to real world is even more simpler. It is total [[Cluelessness]]. We do not care about what is the reason why things work, if they work for us. [[Cluelessness]] is the modern result of the marriage between [[rationalism]] and [[empiricism]].

Cluelessness, or rather ''selective cluelessness'' is a kind of life style and programing meta-methodology introduced in [[TheAPIBook]]'s chapter [[The Art of Building Modern Software]].

Cluelessness, or rather ''selective cluelessness'' is a kind of life style and programing meta-methodology introduced in [[TheAPIBook]]'s chapter [[The Art of Building Modern Software]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his [http://www.oopsla.org/oopsla2006/index.php?title=Martin_Rinard's_Talk presentation] about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is good or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is good. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

The roots of the term [[Cluelessness]] can be traced back to 2006. At OOPSLA 2006, [[MartinRinard]] gave his presentation (slides available here [[Image:RinardOOPSLA06.pdf]]) about minimizing understanding in construction of complex systems. [[Cluelessness]] is great meta principle that allows us to evaluate whether an advice is good or not. If something allows people to achieve more while knowing less, then ''that something'' is good. As a result, almost every [[Good Technology]], needs to exhibit signs of [[Cluelessness]].

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

[[Cluelessness]] principle influences the way we deal with reliability, it justifies the importance of testing and explains why it is necessary to create [[API]]s and do in the right way. All of that helps to increase [[Cluelessness]] of [[HtmlForFood|assemblers]] of our software applications while improving their quality.

Selective [[cluelessness]] is appropriate way to deal with [[Leaky abstractions]] that happen whenever we create an [[API]] (which is an abstraction, a facade over some implementation). Majority of users then deals with the abstraction and only ''experts'' affected by leakages need to dig into the leaking details behind such [[API]]. Quality of an [[API]] can then be judged by the ration between those who are [[cluelessness|cluelessly]] OK with the abstraction and those who need to understand more.

Selective [[cluelessness]] is appropriate way to deal with [[Leaky abstractions]] that happen whenever we create an [[API]] (which is an abstraction, a facade over some implementation). Majority of users then deals with the abstraction only. Just ''experts'' affected by leakages need to dig into the leaking details behind such [[API]]. Quality of an [[API]] can then be judged by the ration between those who are [[cluelessness|cluelessly]] OK with the abstraction and those who need to understand more.