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

Fierce Nerds

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 482 posts

Re: Fierce Nerds

#291

Post by walshemj »

bredren wrote: post #97
pattusk wrote: post #18

> Most people think of nerds as quiet, diffident people. [...] In fact some nerds are quite fierce. That someone would think nerds are not competitive is, to me, the strangest thing about this article. Perhaps because I'm one, but whether it's Magic the gathering, Demoparties, rubics cube solving, chess, Counterstrike LANs, academia, or any of my tech jobs, every "nerdy" activity I've ever engaged with has always bee…

It is probably because competition is so commonly attributed to physical athletics. Physical strength or stamina exhibited on the playing field is competition. Spelling bee competitors are seen positively, but also almost as a joke compared to quarterbacks. Mathlete? A joke in popular culture. There is some evidence that this is changing, but there is also a lot of bad art. The Social Network, and Steve Jobs the film…

to play devils advocate How much is this Amazon or its just the way all warehouse US workers are treated?

I have heard far worse things about non amazon warehouse workers in the UK Sports Direct for example.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#292

Post by ronyeh »

eggbrain wrote: post #288

For me, as much as I am competitive, I feel like it only drives me when the odds of what I am competing for feel somewhat fair. To give an example, a lot of my friends have been into Magic the Gathering for many years, and I recently tried to get into it myself, but the asymmetric gaps were too large for me to enjoy it -- they had way more knowledge, more cards, had spent more money, and had more time to spend playin…

[1] To be a nerd is to be socially awkward, and there are two distinct ways to do that: to be playing the same game as everyone else, but badly, and to be playing a different game. The smart nerds are the latter type.

PG probably agrees with you, as that's the first footnote from his article above.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#293

Post by joshuamorton »

bradleyjg wrote: post #227
fouric wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because others of us have good memories associated with the term. Given the choice between having more language available to use or less, I don't see a reason to want less.

Do you think young African-Americans lucky enough to have never had the N word used as racial epithet against them ought to ignore other parts of the community that tell them this is a very painful term and they should not throw it around causally? What right do you have to reclaim something that was never a source of harm for you to begin with? Doesn’t that make you just another set of bullies metaphorically shoving…

No. Generational reclamation of words is fairly common. The best examples aren't actually race (comparing how "nerd" and the n-word are reclaimed doesn't really work, for reasons that should be obvious in that I'm censoring one).

On the other hand, within the LGBT community, tons of terms have been fully or partially reclaimed. Most notably "queer". That also isn't without controversy (and queer has been in the process of reclamation for longer than "nerd" has been an insult in its current context), but almost no one seems to think that by self-identifying as something (in good faith) you're bullying someone else.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#294

Post by getpost »

Since pg's essay is of a psychoanalytic nature, I'll reply in a psychoanalytic frame, for the sake of conversation, not criticism. [Protip: never psychoanalyze anyone! This likely applies even to psychoanalysts.]

During the last year or two pg has written more than a few essays and tweets which appear to be of a defensive nature. People like him contribute more than other people, it's alright to to be fierce, can't speak the "truth," etc.

Whenever there is dichotomous thinking, cognition has moved away from clarity. If it were me, I'd be asking myself, What is being defended? (This kind of question can be a multi-decade inquiry.)

Although most of us are easily baited into self-justification or self-promotion, I think going down that path it is ultimately a distraction from doing real work and knowing who you are.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#295

Post by username90 »

Bukhmanizer wrote: post #163
GavinMcG wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Overconfidence and self-doubt can go hand-in-hand: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vulnerable_narcissism

Is there a clear definition of self-doubt that doesn’t overlap with underconfidence? Because if the terms we’re using are so broad that a person can both be described as overconfident and underconfident, then as I say elsewhere this just looks like cold reading.

Everyone who says they suffer from impostor syndrome are both overconfident and underconfident, unless they are lying.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#296

Post by thisisbrians »

nindalf wrote: post #120
Bukhmanizer wrote: post #100

A lot of this essay feels a lot like cold reading of tech workers. PG brings up the 8 richest people in America, but if you look at the top like 10-15, the VAST majority are tech CEOs. So that’s who we’re talking about here. First, “independent-mindedness”. I’m guessing that if you survey people, approximately 95% of people would consider themselves “independent-minded”. Then he talks about social awkwardness and int…

Almost anyone reading this would think "oh wow, he's talking about me!" Like you point out, his criteria and statements are vague enough that anyone would think it applies to them. Such only need to follow PG's advice - be "fierce", ie, be an asshole to people to get ahead.

I wouldn't quite equate "be fierce" with "be an asshole". My take: PG is suggesting that smart people who are formidable and stick to their guns are more likely to change the course of things. If you are overly 'kind' and allow all of your good ideas to be dismissed by others, you aren't going to be as successful. This doesn't mean you have to intentionally hurt others in the process. It could mean you take your ferocity and point it at starting your own company because you believe you have a better way and are tired of trying to convince others to your way of thinking.

Edit: a word.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#297

Post by npsimons »

capableweb wrote: post #136
mcguire wrote: post #126

" I have some good news, and some bad news. The good news is that your fierceness will be a great help in solving difficult problems. And not just the kind of scientific and technical problems that nerds have traditionally solved. As the world progresses, the number of things you can win at by getting the right answer increases. Recently getting rich became one of them: 7 of the 8 richest people in America are now fi…

After reading some of his books, essays and hearing people talking about him, I think Graham is first and foremost a nerd and hacker, the other stuff is secondary. At least that's how it looked before the last couple of years, his view on things seems to have slightly changed recently, so not sure anymore actually.

Yeah, given that we're talking about the guy who wrote "On Lisp" I think it's fair to say he has technical credibility.

He may be a dealmaker these days, but that doesn't take away that he is a luminary in the nerd community.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#298

Post by rovolo »

def_true_false wrote: post #114
zozbot234 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This wasn't even Twitter drama. He wrote that in a published book, that then went on and on and on demeaning women in all sorts of "fun" ways (i.e. this isn't a single throwaway statement that might be misunderstood; the misogyny is core to what he was saying). His girlfriend is "special" of course, but he still manages to say very not-nice things about her.

The book is like 5 years old... So, why now? Because of Twitter drama? Edit: Well, it seems that, according to Wikipedia, the impetus might have been an article in tech media (which seems to mean anti-tech media these days).

He also was hired at Apple in April. ~2k Apple employees then signed a letter condemning his hiring after excerpts of his book circulated. This wasn't so much a Twitter mob resurfacing an old book, as a group of Apple employees using a published work to criticize the hiring of a new manager.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/05/13/tech/apple-antonio-garcia-mar...

Re: Fierce Nerds

#299

Post by eggbrain »

ronyeh wrote: post #292
eggbrain wrote: post #288

For me, as much as I am competitive, I feel like it only drives me when the odds of what I am competing for feel somewhat fair. To give an example, a lot of my friends have been into Magic the Gathering for many years, and I recently tried to get into it myself, but the asymmetric gaps were too large for me to enjoy it -- they had way more knowledge, more cards, had spent more money, and had more time to spend playin…

[1] To be a nerd is to be socially awkward, and there are two distinct ways to do that: to be playing the same game as everyone else, but badly, and to be playing a different game. The smart nerds are the latter type. PG probably agrees with you, as that's the first footnote from his article above.

D'oh, this is what I get for not reading the footnotes closely!

Re: Fierce Nerds

#300

Post by username90 »

wiggumspiggums wrote: post #278

"Will you be clever at the expense of others, or will you be kind?" -Jeff Bezos https://www.princeton.edu/news/2010/05/30/2010-baccalaureate... "Fierce nerds" can be valuable. Sure. But the folks who truly stand out in my mind are a level higher. They're the ones at the top of their game, who know how to demand & command excellence, without being jerks about it. I'm reminded of this episode of "The Chef Show" where J…

Once you have achieved significant status and money you no longer need to be fierce since people listen anyway. But most people worth listening to doesn't have significant status and money, instead we wait until they found their own companies and become rich before we listen to them.
Post reply on HN