I don't get this strange virtue of new-age geeks. If you said "Make For the Fun of It", i'd get that; making can sure be fun. But making things for no point whatsoever, other than to keep yourself busy? At least with knitting you eventually get practical use out of what you spent time on.
I have a shelf of unfinished projects and directories full of thousands of lines of unfinished code. In retrospect I wish I had spent my time flying a kite.
The point is that if you are only looking to have fun once the going gets hard you'll just stop and shelve the project. On the other hand, if your goal is to make something ie if you are Making For the Sake of Making (tm) you'll be more likely to actually cross the thresholds of difficulty at which you learn significant lessons.
At times you don't need to learn something which you probably might not implement ever, but its good to know it anyway along the way.
I don't really like how its framed 'Make for the sake of making' but I think that was the idea.
You should complete the good projects and release them.
Maybe it should be "Make and share."
Sure, that works for making websites. In fact, I'd argue that website-building is one of the most easily-publicizable things on the Internet, which is mostly composed of websites.
But what about niche things? I'd greatly enjoy "180 traditional Scottish dance tunes in 180 days", but there's not an HN-ish outlet for that. I'd also enjoy "180 reflections on philosophical readings from the Enlightenment in 180 days", but any philosophers I have easy access to aren't going to be interested—they're beyond that. Similarly for topics I don't actually care about. 180 new meals? Only a few people can eat them. 180 poems? Deliver us.
Dewalt's feat became famous for two reasons: a) It's a common task done in an uncommon way (everyone knows what website-building is, very few think it's reasonable to pop one out every day for six months) and b) The demographic who would be most supportive of it is very easily-accessible in large numbers.
Reflections on philosophical readings? /r/philosophy has 148k subscribers.
180 new meals? Write 'em up on eGullet (I've had very positive responses to my writing up foodie experiments there), /r/food, tell the massive foodie blogosphere about them.
It also doesn't matter, in all cases, how large your audience is, only that they appreciate your work - at least, if you're looking to finish rather than to become famous (which I think was the purpose of this blog post). I've spent 1-2 hours worldbuilding and game desiging every week for the past 4 years for a total audience of two people: the players in my weekly RPG. That's a big enough audience to keep me motivated and keep me creating that particular work - over 200 times so far.
Let's see the quality people can produce, not just quantity. And let's focus on the quality, not on the people.
I like coding too much to be a professional and focus only on getting things done. There is joy in reinventing the wheel and messing about.
Usually when I'm stuck on something its because I don't have a concrete enough definition.
Is this actually a good way to learn how to program? I really doubt it.