Live data from Hacker News

Haters

paulgraham.com

71–80 of 308 posts

Re: Haters

#71

I think there's a bit of cruelty in so casually reducing people to "losers." Taking what must be a complex set of personal histories and circumstances that lead people to that behavior and framing it as a matter of winner vs loser seems to border on smug, especially when the writer is clearly the former.

The post clearly ignores the use of any form of sensitive language, which in this case I thought helped to illustrate the points quite well. Personally, I can’t imagine calling somebody a loser, but in my head I have a very clear idea of what a loser is. To me a loser is anybody that, in spite of the opportunity to do so, doesn’t take any control over their own life, doesn’t take responsibility for themselves, and bl…

The notion of control over one's life is elusive. Our futures can be wrought by trauma, poverty and the lottery that is our DNA, and by extension, our brain. Given the randomness/contingency Graham acknowledges explains his and others' success, and by implication the various dependencies en route to that success, I'd just ask for a bit more compassion for those, whether through birth or circumstance, find themselves constitutionally unable to make the most of their lives in the sense you probably mean. Something as simple as a deficit in executive function can wreak havoc on one's ability to self-motivate, just as an example.

Re: Haters

#73
I usually enjoy PG's articles but this one seems almost attacking some specific group without naming it.

> "It's unfair that so-and-so is famous," but "It's unfair that so-and-so is famous, and not me."

I believe this only takes 1. It's DC vs Marvel. They are similar enough to the rest of the world, but there are nuances to the haters and fanboys. Similar things are Vim vs Emacs, Java vs C#. There were also flamewars between Intel and AMD fans, but since Intel clearly outperformed in previous years, both alliances seem died out almost at the same time -- It's just a CPU.

2. He actually hates the genre/category. He hates comic movies as a whole, as it absorbs most of the resources in the market, making the genre he loves never to be cost-efficient to be made anymore. There were some extraordinary movies in the 20th century because movie companies are still exploring business models.

> "because anyone famous knows how random fame is"

This is where the problem is, just we don't know how to fix it yet. Haters are just a phenomenon. Not only it's random, but also it's ridiculous. Scammers exist because people are vulnerable to scamming; Tiktok exists because people are vulnerable to the designed mechanism. Massive surveillance exists because it just works.

It's more than Okay to criticize scammers instead of competing them.

> "although they are occasionally talented, they have never achieved much."

> "successful enough to have achieved significant fame"

It's very hard to correlate success with fame. Taking PG's Lisp vs Blub example, if someone was evangelizing functional programming in the early 90s, they would never as successful as mediocre OO experts. It takes time. PG has spent so much effort on evangelizing Lisp, he never as famous as Martin Fowler or Uncle Bob in the industry.

As another example, Uncle Bob coined the term SOLID. I found almost all my colleagues know SOLID, most of my colleagues know Uncle Bob. However, those people behind those ideas like Barbara Liskov and Bertrand Meyer are much lesser known.

Re: Haters

#74

I setup a business which had a reasonable amount of success, and the amount and commitment of some of the haters was a real shock to me. Just taking a perspective publically on something fairly innocuous such as which is the best programming language seemed to attract something much more aggressive than the usual debate because I had a bit of a perceived expertise. I had a handful of people follow me online commentin…

> Just taking a perspective publically on something fairly innocuous such as which is the best programming language I wouldn't call that innocuous at all! Quite the opposite, this is the perfect topic for flame war: people tend to have the same kind of emotional attachment to their favorite programming language as to their favorite sport team. You can't really expect a moderate debate on that kind of topics…

That attachment is exactly what PG is talking about. Irrational support.

Re: Haters

#75
I am a hater.

The man I hate is famous, millions of subscribers famous. He makes entertaining (and, sometimes, thoughtful tech videos) on the internet. He is intelligent, funny and charismatic.

But, behind closed doors, the façade that is his personality slips away. And underneath he is a monster. There are stories about this man from the people who have been around him and worked with him. Stories about this man having a tantrum when a sponsor refused to gift him an absurdly costly item in addition to his payment, tickets, hotel stay and a generous per diem. He never stops screaming to the people who work for him. He belittles them. Cuts them down. He abuses everyone around him.

His abuse is prolific. It's not public. But it is prolific. People who know anyone tangential to the space he's in talk about their dealings with him. I have corresponded with him professionally. And that and so much more makes me hate him.

I still enjoy his content, but if people bring him up to me, I pass the word along that he is an unrepentant asshole of the worst stripe. The one who thinks his abuse makes the world a better place. But it really doesn't. Because he just makes videos on the internet.

  –—
I am also a fan.

I am a fan of my friend. He is also famous. But I don't care that he's famous. I don't read nor see any of the things he is famous for. He is my friend first, and I value him for that. I value him for his kindness, honesty and ethics. I value him for saying thank you to his employees after every long day. But most of all, I value him for valuing other people fairly – and going above and beyond when necessary.

It's not that he doesn't has flaws, but it's that he is a fundamentally good person. He does stupid things sometimes. But I have seen him help other people. I have seen him get hurt while helping other people. I have also seen him continue helping others no matter the cost. It's just who he is. He is a bright spot in this universe, and I do critique the things he wants feedback on. Sometimes I re-write important documents for him, because that's not his forte. But I respect and admire him, and I don't think there's anything I can do that will make me stop respecting or admiring him.

His fame makes me hesitant to say more. His privacy matters to me. Because he is a good person intentionally bringing some good into this world. What he does matters, even at the smallest of scales. He matters.

I won't extend the same consideration to the person I hate.

  –—
It is tempting to think that Paul's essay is for me, but it isn't. It's for the extremes of fame. And I have seen these extremes and he's right. These labels he wrote about are an important way to stay sane when you're so fucking famous that reuters measures your farts for clicks;

  I love my fans, but no one ever puts a grasp  
  On the fact I've sacrificed everything I have    
  I never dreamt I'd get to the level that I'm at    
  This is wack, this is more than I ever coulda asked      
  Everywhere I go, a hat, a sweater hood or mask    
  What about math, how come I wasn't ever good at that?    
  It's like the boy in the bubble, who never could adapt    
  I'm trapped, if I could go back, I never woulda rapped    
  I sold my soul to the devil, I'll never get it back      
  I just wanna leave this game with level head intact     
  Imagine goin' from bein' a no-one to seein'     
  Everything blow up, and all you did was just grow up emceein'   
  It's fuckin' crazy, ‘cause all I wanted was to give Hailie  
  The life I never had, instead I forced us to live alienated

Re: Haters

#76
post #61

What I see here as a huge problem is (and not only in this article) that the word hater is used to disqualify a genuine and true criticism with good fundamental basis. Haters gonna hate, right? In todays society pop culture is what is mainstream: think positive, smile, listen songs that dont mean anything but are also not hurting anyone, be happy, even if something is negative concentrate on positive (X company is ad…

I think you missed the point. Graham is explicitly not using hater to disqualify genuine criticism but to identify people whose hate is irrational, who can't be reasoned with. Obviously it's a risk that someone can dismiss genuine criticism as hate (and people do this all the time), but that's not what Graham's advocating here.

Re: Haters

#78
post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

pg points out on Twitter that haters are rarer than fanboys I wonder if it is rarer, or that haters are caused by a reaction to fanboys? It seems to me that haters often start off reacting to the uncritical nature of fanboyism, and then that reaction slowly slips into hate directed at the person. (Not always though - maybe this is one particular type of the fanboy/hater relationship)

> I wonder if it is rarer, or that haters are caused by a reaction to fanboys? Most ventures fail. Startup ventures fail even more often. If your goal was to be right most often, you would just bet that every new thing would fail. So there's something inherently illogical about being a fanboy about anything. A fanboy is definitely doing more than just looking at the odds and making a rational decision, they are putti…

I don't think this matches the behavior in many areas.

Look at Apple fanboys. They seem to cause haters because of their uncritical boosting of anything Apple.

(Also PG's essay seemed mostly about fanboys and haters of people, not of a particular startup)

Re: Haters

#79

Sometimes being a hater is not because one is unsuccessful or successful in their craft. A lot of hate in the modern age is driven by ideological capture. If someone is in your ideological outgroup and famous, hate them. If someone is a billionaire and your ideology tends towards the marxist, hate them, etc.

Isn't the ideological capture a consequence of being a loser? It's such people the promises of ideologies are targeted at, whether they promise equal wealth for all, punishment of people perceived as responsible for one's ailings, or posthumous rewards for unselfish behaviour.

Re: Haters

#80
I think we all feel these feelings somewhere deep in our minds. Haters and fanboys are just the extremities.

Most people are not complete losers or complete winners. Sometimes they feel a bit of a loser, especially if they have high ambitions but not much above average success, and sometimes they feel winners, especially when compared with people who have clearly achieved less then them in life. Feeling a loser will drive some envy towards people who are very successful. 'It is not only their talent, they were also lucky, they were at the right place at the right time'. Which is partially true.

What pg didn't discuss is that different people get different amount of hate. For example people who misattribute their success to their technical-talent in a technical field, but their success clearly involves other kind of talent or luck get more hate then pure technical geniuses. Also people who like to express strong opinions on lots of often subjective topics get more hate than people sticking to their expertise and to mostly technical topics. For example pg obviously gets more hate than John Carmack or John Von Neumann.

But at the end of the day: everybody must work on this inside their own brain. Even if it were sometimes satisfying to be a bit of a hater, just don't be one.

Post reply on HN