Was just reminded that the last paper rejection I got included a reviewer comment: "too much psychology for a software engineer audience."

[kingmaype@mastodon.green]

@grimalkina

Tolerance can also be an inability to recognise.

[parsingphase@m.phase.org]

@grimalkina As a Software Engineer I am offended, I've already had to be confused by networking, FinTech and genetics in my career, why should I be denied being confused by psychology, too?

[scottwilson@infosec.exchange]

@grimalkina

Dr. Hicks: “too much psychology for a software engineer audience”

Your new tagline!

[grimalkina@mastodon.social]

@KingmaYpe that's true....I do think there's a lot of distress overtolerance in tech

[doctormo@floss.social]

@grimalkina

"too phycho for tech"

[mahryekuh@hachyderm.io]

One of the problems that would be solved is website usability, as that requires some knowledge of the human mind.

I recently wrote about that in this article:

https://marijkeluttekes.dev/blog/articles/2026/03/16/why-frontends-fail-when-you-approach-them-like-a-backend/

(Link posted with @grimalkina's permission.)

[ainmosni@social.ainmosni.eu]

@mahryekuh @grimalkina You say that, but there’s a lot is psychology in certain game companies and it’s used for a lot of evil.

[mahryekuh@hachyderm.io]

@ainmosni @grimalkina Do you mean addictive patterns?

Because I didn't even think about that, but that's definitely a real problem.

Same with addictive social media timelines.

Guess Big Tech is better at using psychology for evil than for good?

[chemoelectric@masto.ai]

@grimalkina Maybe the stuff is too good for the journals.

[grimalkina@mastodon.social]

@chemoelectric backalley open access preprints you can quietly give your friends is where my best work is, truly. I think the highest quality work and writing I've done is contained in these preprints

[paco@infosec.exchange]

@grimalkina “Please do not bring introspection to this audience. They do not want to think about the ramifications of their work.”

[ronjeffries@mastodon.social]

@grimalkina
I suppose I spent many years thinking software dev was pure tech. I was quite mistaken .... and still prefer the tech bits.

[chemoelectric@masto.ai]

@grimalkina In fundamental physics you cannot find quality stuff at all in the ‘elite’ journals. There they publish only utter nonsense.

(I’m not a physicist, thank goodness. A retired computer programmer with an engineering education, but who dabbles in a few physics topics without publishing except from a soapbox. But I do subscribe to the ACM Digital Library!)

[chemoelectric@masto.ai]

@grimalkina I write code. I lace my code and READMEs with ‘psychological’ commentary. Lately it has been stuff about how, no, it is not R⁷RS Scheme that is reactionary, it is R⁶RS Scheme that was reactionary, because it rejected the SRFIs. I actually stick this stuff in my libraries because I think it explains a lot.

[chrisjrn@social.coop]

@grimalkina (remind me to encourage you to come to #NBPy next year )

[kevingranade@mastodon.gamedev.place]

@grimalkina smells a lot like "too political".

[deborahh@cosocial.ca]

@grimalkina @KingmaYpe for sure. Hero culture.

[drgroftehauge@sigmoid.social]

@grimalkina I have a wonderful image in my mind of you with a tour guide hat and flag on a stick, showing psychologists around a conference. Half tour guide half David Attenborough maybe.

[internic@mathstodon.xyz]

@grimalkina I think software engineers underrate how often they are actually talking about psychology (or human behavioral science more generally). In my experience, it's a pretty significant proportion of the time.

[adrianh@mastodon.social]

@grimalkina Put it on the book jacket. Only half joking