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

371–380 of 482 posts

Re: Fierce Nerds

#371

Post by bdavisx »

pseudalopex wrote: post #356
ping_pong wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you only believing what you read in the media or do you know people that actually work at Amazon? The fact that Amazon employees in a warehouse rejected unionization speaks volumes. And I know plenty of Amazon engineers that love working there. To put it in perspective, there may be employees that hate working at Amazon, but there are also 100,000 employees. If only 10% of the employees hated working there, that'…

I know people who work at Amazon. Not even the people who like it say it's kind.

I've heard "cut-throat", but not kind.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#372

Post by novosel »

greyhair wrote: post #347

I worked with a number of brilliant people at Bell Labs through the 1980s/1990s. The most comfortably competent among them, the most productive among them, were also the least abrasive. They were also the most self deprecating. Not just one or two, but the majority of them. To the point that the aggressive geniuses stood out. And I worked for/with two abrasive ones as well, so I know the difference. The same was true…

There is a Russian saying:

Who is a wise man?

The one that always seeks to occupy the smallest place/room.

Nota Bene: I am not a Russian, but simply encountered this formulation several times.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#373

Post by thesausageking »

samatman wrote: post #354
thesausageking wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

PG hacked the VC system so he didn't have to be a dealmaker. YC has standard terms so there's no haggling on price, pro rata, board seats, or anything else. They've automated a lot of what they do via software and their network. And because of the content they put out and the reputation they've built, founders from all over the world come to them and accept much worse terms than any normal VC would offer.

The big question is whether this leads to better overall outcomes. If the company fails, or is aquihired by the skin of its teeth, it doesn't matter which terms the various rounds offered when. YC is perceived as offering a greater chance of success, a combination of being plugged into a large network of alumni and having the halo effect which comes from getting into a cohort. As long as that perception is there, fou…

The terms are worse in the sense that they're at a much lower valuation than most VCs would offer, not that it wasn't a good deal for the startup. Almost every YC alumni I've talked to believes it was worth it.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#374

Post by mjfl »

Tomminn wrote: post #366
mjfl wrote: post #363

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like the cow talking about how they don't like mean other cows while Paul Graham was probably talking about the farmer.

Absolutely, the best people at Bell labs in the 80's were "like cows".

I mean they oversaw the decline of Bell labs so...

Re: Fierce Nerds

#375

Post by heavyset_go »

helen___keller wrote: post #21

I enjoy reading Paul Graham's musings on nerds / nerdiness, but I can't help but have difficulty relating. Maybe it's a generational thing (born in '92), but Graham often seems to paint a picture of nerds similar to what you might see in movies and TV shows depicting the 80s, like the kids in Stranger Things. Even this article, while I can certainly conjure which of my friends growing up were the "fierce nerd", it st…

> Maybe it's a generational thing (born in '92), but Graham often seems to paint a picture of nerds similar to what you might see in movies and TV shows depicting the 80s, like the kids in Stranger Things.

Graham's characterizations of nerds reminds me of the "They don't know" meme[1] guy.

[1] https://www.buzzfeed.com/kristatorres/they-dont-know-twitter

Re: Fierce Nerds

#376

Post by fungiblecog »

I think the problem with Paul Graham's writing is that it always comes down to talking about getting rich.

A lot of people - including very intelligent people - have other things they'd rather do than play such a stupid game. Unfortunately the world is pushing everyone in that direction which will create a lot of bitterness because most people necessarily lose that game.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#377

Post by tomcam »

greyhair wrote: post #347

I worked with a number of brilliant people at Bell Labs through the 1980s/1990s. The most comfortably competent among them, the most productive among them, were also the least abrasive. They were also the most self deprecating. Not just one or two, but the majority of them. To the point that the aggressive geniuses stood out. And I worked for/with two abrasive ones as well, so I know the difference. The same was true…

Microsoft vet from 1990s-2000: same. Got to work with many of my programming heroes, and many of the same people influencing programming language design, Azure, and .NET even now. The vast majority were a pure joy to work with, just as you describe.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#378

Post by tomcam »

steve_adams_86 wrote: post #349
greyhair wrote: post #347

I worked with a number of brilliant people at Bell Labs through the 1980s/1990s. The most comfortably competent among them, the most productive among them, were also the least abrasive. They were also the most self deprecating. Not just one or two, but the majority of them. To the point that the aggressive geniuses stood out. And I worked for/with two abrasive ones as well, so I know the difference. The same was true…

My favourite people to work with are the gentle geniuses. I love to be wrong around them because I get to learn, and I love opportunities to present something useful I've done and know it will become a valuable contribution. I avoid the other kind of person like a plague now. They ruin otherwise excellent teams. They might be fine to have a drink with or something, but in day to day work, they are sand paper. Another…

I know, right? It is one of the greatest things in the world to be the dumbest guy in a room full of really smart, secure people. It’s like you’re getting a mini postdoc education for free, compressed into a few minutes.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#379

Post by tomcam »

novosel wrote: post #372
greyhair wrote: post #347

I worked with a number of brilliant people at Bell Labs through the 1980s/1990s. The most comfortably competent among them, the most productive among them, were also the least abrasive. They were also the most self deprecating. Not just one or two, but the majority of them. To the point that the aggressive geniuses stood out. And I worked for/with two abrasive ones as well, so I know the difference. The same was true…

There is a Russian saying: Who is a wise man? The one that always seeks to occupy the smallest place/room. Nota Bene: I am not a Russian, but simply encountered this formulation several times.

Wise and true. I totally agree with it in principle. *

* Whoever said this didn’t own a grand piano. Just saying.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#380

Post by jvanderbot »

whatshisface wrote: post #315
getpost wrote: post #294

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 s…

PG, if you asked him, might describe himself as defending people who do real work from a larger culture that all too often prioritizes serving the status quo over accomplishing the goals that the status quo was established to accomplish. One example of that would be SpaceX doing the launch vehicle design work that the NASA/Boeing/Big Government Contractor complex was established to do. At the same time, SpaceX works…

I would like people to stop believing that this is a real example, at least around here (I'm close to a few NASA missions). SpaceX was selected by NASA for some lunar lift services, and everyone I know is quite excited by US's expanding lift / launch capabilities. I think that I and those around me exist in these roles to serve the needs of the nation and priorities of congress and the scientific community, and will use any tools at our disposal to do so.

Other companies may fight this, sure, but stop throwing NASA (an exploration agency) in with those who would benefit from suppressing SpaceX.

Personal opinion.

Post reply on HN