Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Think for Yourself

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

791–800 of 874 posts

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#791

Post by dahx4Eev »

username90 wrote: post #790
polote wrote: post #701

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are getting from HN at your current age with your experience, is not the same that what your young self would have gotten from the same content

I learned that working at Google pays a ton and not that hard to get in there. So I learned to code and got a job at Google and made a lot of money thanks to HN. My life got a lot easier thanks to that. I feel the value of HN is greatly reduced once you are more familiar with the industry. But to an outsider this site is gold.

Are there any sites that are gold for HNers?

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#793

Post by geomark »

He says "...good universities are still an excellent way to meet independent-minded people." Is that even true anymore? So many of the ones I considered "good" have gone over to the whole SJW/microaggressions/safe spaces mentality. Any independent thinkers will have a hard time finding each other at those places. Are there any universities left where you would have your ideas really challenged? That's what I would expect at university.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#794

Post by rdslw »

ryeguy_24 wrote: post #615

Am I the only one is getting pretty bored of "formula for success" content? This essay and other's like it, without evidence or data, implies that some of us know the formula for success. I get it, the things that change convention are unconventional at first. This is the definition of unconventional. I agree with the general vector of his essay but this is just boring to me. Here is my formula for success (in case a…

It is even worse.

This article is (yet another) attemp to romanticize and put to pedestal 'startup with a novel idea'. It is worth to mention that trying to trick/persuade/convince (choose freely) thousands (literaly) of people to go this path, benefits tremendously ycombinator - not the persuaded founders. Because for YC if only few are (hugely) successfull they win. Not so for the other thousands. The fact that few means 200 here, does not change that 'other' means around dozens of thousands.

Startups with 'right but not novel' are also GOOD. But they are muuuuch worse for YC. YC is not seeking all investments to end with modest returns. YC is seeking few, but with HUGE returns.

Pay attention also, that ycombinator itself is in the 'right, but not inventive' camp. It's like 'selling investing advices', while in the same time, author makes money on sth completly different (advices :). BAD ADVICES, to be exact.

p.s. I'm also tired on romanticizing airbnb in literally 3 paragraph (search for airbeds if you missed it). This is a pattern.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#795

Post by __float »

geomark wrote: post #793

He says "...good universities are still an excellent way to meet independent-minded people." Is that even true anymore? So many of the ones I considered "good" have gone over to the whole SJW/microaggressions/safe spaces mentality. Any independent thinkers will have a hard time finding each other at those places. Are there any universities left where you would have your ideas really challenged? That's what I would ex…

Perhaps “safe spaces” are a lofty goal to allow students to focus on intellectual exploration rather than devoting a lot of mental energy to the slow drip of “microaggressions”.

It sounds like you might be in one of the “niche conformists” pg describes.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#796

Post by b0rsuk »

cratermoon wrote: post #742
ryeguy_24 wrote: post #615

Am I the only one is getting pretty bored of "formula for success" content? This essay and other's like it, without evidence or data, implies that some of us know the formula for success. I get it, the things that change convention are unconventional at first. This is the definition of unconventional. I agree with the general vector of his essay but this is just boring to me. Here is my formula for success (in case a…

This article is self-contradictory. The premise of the article is that you have to be unconventional and do things others aren't do to be successful. And then the author "proves" the premise by saying, "just like all these other successful people did!" The formulae are all driven by survivorship bias anyway.

He claims you have to be unconventional to be successful in pursuits which reward independent thinking. He named at least one profession where being conventional is desirable: an administrator.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#797

Post by nottrobin »

I basically completely disagree with everything in this article. And the article provides scant evidence to support its (to me) extremely controversial framing of the world.

To start with, I think it's complete bullshit that most work doesn't require independent mindedness, or creativity. Or that most work is uncreative.

Second, I strongly question the assertion that independent mindedness is innate in any sense. I don't believe there's any strong evidence to support this statement, and believing it leads to some pretty dangerous attitudes to the world and other people.

Thirdly, and somewhat illustrative of my previous point, I am quite repulsed by the suggestion that most people think they're free thinkers but aren't. How the hell do you know and who are you to day?

I'm not interested in that obnoxious arrogance.

Yuck

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#798

Post by b0rsuk »

username90 wrote: post #62
amadeuspagel wrote: post #50

Like many of pg's essays there's an unqualified glorification of being independent. For example the suggestion that hiring conformist people is something that just happens. It seems more likely that companies more or less consciously hire such people, because a company where everyone thinks independently would be one where everyone wants to do something different, and nothing would get done, no one could agree on any…

Being independent is mostly negative. Prison is full of independent thinkers. However the small share of independent thinkers who actually got many things right are way more valuable than any conventional thinker as it is them who push society forward. Glorifying them is absolutely warranted.

Are gang members also independent thinkers?

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#799

Post by geomark »

__float wrote: post #795
geomark wrote: post #793

He says "...good universities are still an excellent way to meet independent-minded people." Is that even true anymore? So many of the ones I considered "good" have gone over to the whole SJW/microaggressions/safe spaces mentality. Any independent thinkers will have a hard time finding each other at those places. Are there any universities left where you would have your ideas really challenged? That's what I would ex…

Perhaps “safe spaces” are a lofty goal to allow students to focus on intellectual exploration rather than devoting a lot of mental energy to the slow drip of “microaggressions”. It sounds like you might be in one of the “niche conformists” pg describes.

Haha. I'm asking for suggestions of unis where I can still be challenged and even offended, and someone comes along with some psycho babble about me being a conformist of some sort. If I put on my psycho babble hat I might think they spent too much time in one of those safe spaces.

Re: How to Think for Yourself

#800

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

randcraw wrote: post #768
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #290

I dunno. Like everything, we need balance. Brilliance needs to be balanced with patience, persistence and practicality. Working for a Japanese corporation taught me to really respect the "three P's." They didn't have the kind of creativity to invent the next iPhone, but they had what it takes to make it better than everyone else, and in a fairly short time. Great things are accomplished by great teams, and teams need…

I agree that pg's model for thinking serves disruptive-based enterprises like small startups much better than consensus-based endeavors like a large corporation, a military, or a football team. Groupthink is an essential skill when cooperation is more important to success than innovation. Propaganda and the delusions that ensue from it are how you build teams.

Hmm... not sure I'd put it that way.

We can't have teams that are composed of both independent thinkers and implementation experts?

I think of companies like Apple, that had a couple of rather...mercurial types at the head, and a large team of highly skilled implementors to realize their view.

I guess what I was talking about, is that we get all caught up in brilliant "visionaries," and forget that someone needs to actually do the work in the trenches to get the "vision" up and going.

I encounter outright disdain for skilled implementors, even though they are just as rare as "visionaries."

Sure, there are lots of people with the correct job titles, a firm grasp of jargon, and a willingness to take money, but it is just as difficult to find good implementation experts, as it is to find good visionaries.

It isn't as "sexy" to be an implementation expert, but it is very, very important.

Post reply on HN