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

Earnestness

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 478 posts

Re: Earnestness

#121

Post by adamsea »

brighton36 wrote: post #68
throwaway2245 wrote: post #36

Denial of the existence of white supremacy is a fun easter egg embedded in the middle of the essay.

Unfortunately, the problem with seeing white supremacy is that in doing so, we create white supremacy.

[EDIT: Every statement here is a basic fact, easily verifiable and backed by reputable scholarship and reaearch. Controversy comes from peoples dislike of the implication of these facts, not the truthfulness of the statements themselves. TBH I think downvoters should be ashamed of themselves. Or, better educate themselves.]

What? No.

White supremacy is literally a cop murdering a man by pressing his knee on the guys neck until he dies, with the cops buddies standing by and watching.

White supremacy is Ahmad Arbery being murdered while jogging because he was black:

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/us-news/202...

White supremacy is the crack epidemic being treated primarily like a criminal issue in the 80s, and the opioid epidemic today being treated primarily like a health issue. Why? Because the crack epidemic primarily effected black people, and the opioid epidemic white people.

White supremacy is racist housing policies where Black people can’t get loans:

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2018/03/chicago...

https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/05/the-rac...

I understand the discomfort, confusion, and frustration that can arise when talking about racism and white supremacy, and there certainly are plenty of people who don’t express themselves in the most palatable way about it or who also believe things that may not be true.

But white supremacy is a real thing and if you take fifteen minutes online and look at wikipedia, and the articles I shared (in particular The Atlantic ones), then you’ll see that it’s real, it’s a thing.

And at that point it’s then not a question of what anybody sees, but rather what you yourself choose to accept.

Re: Earnestness

#122

Post by csallen »

nindalf wrote: post #92
qPM9l3XJrF wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you folks are holding PG to a standard that the vast majority of essays which hit the HN frontpage would not meet. Even this critical essay looks like it fails to meet its own standard. A "profoundly unserious" writer which is "mired in intuition and incuriosity"? Nowhere in the post are these terms rigorously defined! And look! The author accuses Graham of "tantalizing the reader by reducing complex problems…

The vast majority of essays submitted to HN don’t reach the front page because the author isn’t famous. Whereas PG rockets to the top of the front page within an hour of submission. Even then, the average HN comments section is highly sceptical of any claims in any post. The top comment is usually critiquing the link for one reason or another. For some reason, that wasn’t the case with PG articles. You’re only remark…

"…finally holding PG to the same standard…"

The typical reaction to PG essays on HN has been the exact same flavor of negative for many, many years now. Go back and read the comments on his previous submissions. PG himself even wrote an essay about uncharitable criticism and basically exited the site in 2015.

It's very surprising to me that anyone could think that, in 2020, it's new and original to bash PG articles on HN.

Re: Earnestness

#123

Post by Bresenham »

> Reporters literally can't believe it when founders making piles of money say that they started their companies to make the world better. The situation seems made for mockery. How can these founders be so naive as not to realize how implausible they sound?

I can't speak for someone like Kara Swisher, but attempting to channel her, I don't think she would think it is beyond belief that some hacker teenager who dropped out of a good college to work on X was earnest that they were trying to make the world better.

The mockery over naivete and implausibility comes from that those teenagers will walk into a VC office on Sand Hill Road, where they will sign over various rights for the future. They will then form a Delaware corporation. With plans to raise more VC, after that an IPO, and finally dividends. Which means what? What came from those who did this in the past?

- The Steve Jobs orchestrated formerly secret cabal, that included Eric Schmidt and others, to drive down engineer salaries in the Bay.

- Social networks amplifying traffic saying Covid is a hoax, and here we are with 3000 dying of Covid in the US on Wednesday.

- The widespread spying and surveillance of people that almost all these companies have a hand in - even Adobe has become a surveillance company.

It's the thinking that the corporations that will be the IBMs, Oracles and Microsofts of the future are there to "make the world better". It is risible.

Re: Earnestness

#124

Post by oblio »

11thEarlOfMar wrote: post #87
danhak wrote: post #70

In my view, there is a uniquely American fiction that there exists for everyone some pursuit that both (a) will satisfy their passion and (b) be highly remunerative. Your job is to find that pursuit. And if you fail, I guess it's because you weren't earnest enough. I don't doubt that successful founders are highly motivated by the challenges of their work. But the suggestion that the point isn't to build a business a…

Not speaking for all Americans, but I've never believed that (a) and (b) are both out there if I can simultaneously solve them. I chose to give one preference and then did the best to support the other. It's an optimization activity that may or may not achieve satisfaction on either one. It's the outliers who become wealthy doing what they love. No illusions there. The other 'responsibility' we take collectively is t…

> It's the outliers who become wealthy doing what they love. No illusions there.

More than that, even if you love your work, there will still be moments you hate it. That's why we get paid/need rewards.

People generally love an idealized version of their work, where everything works the first time, there is no grunge work, people are pleasant and cooperate with you.

Re: Earnestness

#125

Post by zepto »

ckastner wrote: post #118
zepto wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You’re going to need to explain how you conclude that I am making an appeal to authority. I didn’t say anything about the validity of his argument. Only that it means something different and more interesting given his experience, than it would coming from someone else. Even when he is wrong, it is more interesting to us than when a random blogger is wrong.

> You’re going to need to explain how you conclude that I am making an appeal to authority. Because of your phrasing: "Yes. It’s because of who he is." > Even when he is wrong, it is more interesting to us than when a random blogger is wrong. Relative to each other, perhaps. However, is something wrong by PG more interesting than literally every other topic being discussed on HN, so that it "rockets to the top", to q…

In that phrase, “Yes. It’s because of who he is.”, I am not referring to the validity of his argument. I am explaining the fact that his posts receive a lot of attention.

There is simply no appeal to authority being made.

The rest of your comment isn’t clear, are you saying there is something wrong with people finding PG’s pieces interesting?

Re: Earnestness

#126

Post by ghufran_syed »

I think this essay would be more effective if the author defined what they mean by “earnest”. I think based on the essay, they mean seriousness + sincerity. But there is also a sense that the author considers “correct” as part of the definition:

>“when you call someone earnest, you’re making a statement about their motives. It means both that they’re doing something for the right reasons [my emphasis] and they’re trying as hard as I can”

So why assume that “interest in the problem” is intrinsically good? Do we really believe it’s not possible for a politician to be addressing the problem of “improving people’s lives” via the intermediate aim of “gaining political power”? So why wouldn’t that also be classified as “earnest”? If a gang leader is addressing the problem of “keeping our guys safe”, and therefore murders members of a rival gang who pose a threat to them, wouldn’t that also be “earnest”? Is it just because the author holds people working individually on a certain class of problems to be admirable, while having a much more negative view or politicians and criminals?

[Edit: I forgot to mention that I think there are some good points in this essay, and I agree with many of them, but I think it leaves some important areas unexplored]

Re: Earnestness

#127

Post by Quarrelsome »

bluntfang wrote: post #69
warent wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The sentence you opened this up with comes across kind of concerning and gross. For reasons?

I'm with you here buddy. seems like he was doing something shady the way he expressed it. probably lonely and providing alcohol/drugs for minors in order to have company.

> it sounds shady so it probably was

c'mon catch people a break. Maybe they were a former alchy giving AA advice to troubled kids, maybe they don't like talking about their religion online

Re: Earnestness

#128

Post by pjc50 »

swyx wrote: post #52
ignoramous wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I seek to try to make myself more earnest and undo the damage of fear of retribution/shame but I'm always a bit sad when I get in trouble because I was straight forward but adult politics is sadly complex sometimes. You might enjoy reading these two posts and discussions: "The power of ignorance" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23041281 "Asking questions" https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=22729028

I've also written about this effect, called Lampshading: https://www.swyx.io/lampshading/ asking the "stupid question" is a strength when done in taste.

One of the most powerful things you can do as a senior engineer for juniors is to show by example that it's OK to ask questions and to not know all the answers. Especially if you can see that someone else isn't sure but dares not ask that question.

Re: Earnestness

#129

Post by gabereiser »

warent wrote: post #35
boxed wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once in my 20s I hung out with some young teenagers at a summer camp for reasons . One night we were talking and one girl started asking questions and the rest of the group sneered at her "not knowing". She ignored them and kept asking because I was earnest and knowledgeable. Five minutes turned to an hour and I think everyone in that group learned (or at least heard) more about the origins of the universe, stellar e…

The sentence you opened this up with comes across kind of concerning and gross. For reasons?

I’m glad I wasn’t the only one who shuttered at that sentence. A better one would have been “as a camp mentor in my 20s”...

Re: Earnestness

#130

Post by kazinator »

"Earnestness sounds like a boring, even Victorian virtue."

Well, that's because it's even in the title of a Victorian book: The Importance of being Earnest, Oscar Wilde.

Post reply on HN