More interesting than the original article was a comment on Hacker News:

To clarify his terminology: the “real programmer” values the means; the “dude” values the ends.
It’s a question of what one values, and this does tend to be mutually exclusive, in the specific sense that when they are in conflict, you must choose one over the other - which one do you choose? That shows what you value. While you can be highly skilled at both, you will tend to focus on what you value more, and therefore practice it with greater attendance, and therefore get better at it (and you probably were better at it in the first place - which is why you value it). I think Catmull (of Pixar) is a great example of brilliance at both means and ends - but he values ends.
This “real programmer” is a professional, who will tend to be obsessed with technical skills, whether they are useful or not, because to him these skills are valuable in themselves. The “dude” is an entrepreneur, looks at what is needed, and how these needs can be met.
Here’s an illustrative story: I met a surgeon who worked in Nepal for 10 years, as a missionary, religious calling. Although he tried really hard, and worked really hard, he felt he didn’t make any lasting impact, and in fact, he said that “digging ditches” for sewage would have helped more people, by preventing diseases through better sanitation. I was excited about this deeper understanding, and asked him why he didn’t do that. He said that it was because he was a surgeon, and his skills would be wasted if he didn’t use them. He cared more about means (being a surgeon) than ends (actually helping people). He was a professional.
I enjoy solving problems. It’s exciting, interesting and engaging. But it seems to have a kind of negative basis, like a doctor preferring sickness to health, or a priest who practices always compassion, never appreciation.
But in the end, it’s far better to care about something - whether it’s means or ends - than to care for nothing at all.