[woahhvicky]

I think the point is that you don’t need approval from anyone to find value in your own work. Who cares if crypto “experts” condone the use of your library? All that matters is that it provides you value in your endeavors. “Showing them” is not necessary for that.

[dhartsfield]

If it's going into production it matters. Bad crypto is only slightly better than no crypto. In some cases it could be worse.

[woahhvicky]

Where did I say bad crypto is fine in production?

[baking]

I don't think that is the point at all. To that end lies madness.

[lovemenot]

I suspect you may've misinterpreted your parent.

Showing "them" would be pure social validation and, according to your parent, not recommended. Showing "that" would be sanity protection, just as you understand it.

[baking]

Thanks for the clarification.

[woahhvicky]

If you think so then you’ve misinterpreted my comment.

[baking]

I would make a distinction between 1) working on some project ignoring what others are working on or what they would say about the potential value of the work until you have reached some milestone and are ready to present it to the world and receive critical feedback, and 2) working on something without concern for anyone else ever finding value in it.

Feynman is clearly saying disregard others while you are doing the work, not disregard others when you present it for feedback and criticism. That is the spirit with which I responded.

As a developer, there is a third option where your work is simply ignored. If it is functional for you and you are satisfied with your own work, then sure, feel free to disregard others lack of interest, like an artist who values their own work but meets a deafening silence. But please don't disregard serious criticism.

[woahhvicky]

It seems like your view of “valuing your own work” is narrower than mine. I never said disregard criticism, I said approval is not necessary to find value.