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

451–460 of 482 posts

Re: Fierce Nerds

#451

Post by TheGigaChad »

ziggus wrote: post #108
oreally wrote: post #58

That's a pretty good description, and many of the posts here are about fierce nerds with petty issues which I think the essay is not about. I've grown into that fierce nerd. Being in forced conscription in my 20s has made me wary of the 'wait to rush for nothing meaningful' culture. Then I joined companies and it feels like a ton of my time is wasted by processes, norms and ideologies. I did break out once to try and…

"...a ton of my time is wasted by processes, norms and ideologies." So, all the stuff that helps society function?

Suck dick. How about you follow this guidance?

Re: Fierce Nerds

#452

Post by yupper32 »

AussieWog93 wrote: post #414
yupper32 wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That still doesn't mean that not yelling should receive any sort of admiration. You don't get bonus points for doing what should be the bare minimum, regardless of what the current norms are.

I don't see why not. Should the anti-slavery campaigners of the 1800s receive no admiration, despite social norms at the time, because vocal opposition to slavery "should be the bare minimum"? What about companies now that go out of their way to make sure none of the workers in their supply chain are exploited? That should be the bare minimum - should we ignore the effort that they've gone to? What about a family mem…

Are you for real?

Man, who would have thought "not yelling at your employees isn't an accomplishment" would be controversial...

> Should the anti-slavery campaigners of the 1800s receive no admiration, despite social norms at the time, because vocal opposition to slavery "should be the bare minimum"?

Not even close to the same. This case would be like admiring all the people that happened to not own slaves. Congrats?

Anti-slavery campaigners were doing way more than the bare minimum. No one lost their lives over just not having slaves.

> What about companies now that go out of their way to make sure none of the workers in their supply chain are exploited? That should be the bare minimum - should we ignore the effort that they've gone to?

Not even close to the same. This case would be like admiring the factory manager for not exploiting their employees. Congrats?

> What about a family member who's been clean from drugs for 10 years? Should we celebrate with them, or just ignore their achievement because not being addicted to drugs is pretty much considered the bare minimum by broader society?

Maybe if yelling at employees was incredibly physically addictive.

Literally my whole point is that you all are saying, "Wow, it's so admirable that you're not a piece of shit!".

Re: Fierce Nerds

#453

Post by AussieWog93 »

yupper32 wrote: post #452
AussieWog93 wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see why not. Should the anti-slavery campaigners of the 1800s receive no admiration, despite social norms at the time, because vocal opposition to slavery "should be the bare minimum"? What about companies now that go out of their way to make sure none of the workers in their supply chain are exploited? That should be the bare minimum - should we ignore the effort that they've gone to? What about a family mem…

Are you for real? Man, who would have thought "not yelling at your employees isn't an accomplishment" would be controversial... > Should the anti-slavery campaigners of the 1800s receive no admiration, despite social norms at the time, because vocal opposition to slavery "should be the bare minimum"? Not even close to the same. This case would be like admiring all the people that happened to not own slaves. Congrats?…

I am 100% for real. Everyone is a piece of shit in one way or another - and rarely do people stop being a piece of shit until some sort of external judgement/pressure is applied.

The fact that this guy refused to shout at his staff, even though he was in an environment where shouting at staff is completely tolerated, is an admirable and frankly rare trait.

It shows he actually cares about other people, rather than doing what is socially acceptable/beneficial to himself.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#454

Post by username90 »

philosopher1234 wrote: post #442
username90 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

This may be true for you, but not for me. I listen to many people who are not well known, and who are not rich, and who arae not startup founders. For instance, none of my friends are rich startup founders, neither is my partner, nor my therapist, nor my coworkers, yet I consider all their opinions valuable (more so than the rich "fierce nerds"). Most of the podcasts I listen to are not run by the rich and powerful,…

It is true for society in aggregate, which is why big companies often loses to small startups on their own strong points. That should be basically impossible if the big companies were anywhere close to rational, but as we know such things happens all the time.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#455

Post by username90 »

ziziyO wrote: post #333
whatshisface wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

Why can’t we have both? A job where we can “actually do stuff” without getting mistreated by psychotic billionaires. There’s a lack of compassion in tech.

Because big companies would never let a person like Elon Musk create something like Space X internally.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#456

Post by courtf »

PG often writes about people as if they have immutable characteristics, like being mean, or a hater, or a loser, or having fierceness. It's a dull, incomplete way to look at the world that makes his writing wooden and unrelatable. Observing the world, especially fellow human beings, in such rigid, discrete contrasts would seem to drain life of any dynamism, producing a grayscale vision of reality that belies all but the most shallow information about any subject. Despite admitting his ignorance of their origins, he still doesn't hold back on suggesting motivations and life stories that might explain people's behavior. Why anyone would turn to a VC for this kind of writing baffles me, but I guess there are people out there who entertain themselves by reading appliance manuals and the like.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#457

Post by mjburgess »

joshuamorton wrote: post #284
mjburgess wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I think we have to take "woke" to mean the most plausible worst version of this ideology; or else we'd just name it charitably. Ie., the OP comment is nervous about being associated with the type of thinking i'm talking about. It's entirely fair to say that whilst accommodating and judging people individually we need to account for that person's particular difficulty in first being judged in this manner -- becau…

> Consider, for example, the most effective civil rights president in US history (LBJ) was a racist: did we need to solve his prejudice first? Would that have done anything positive? The current iteration of the civil rights movement is solving a different problem than that of 1968. Due to LBJ's actions, minorities are equal under the law. You can't just pass laws to make them more equal. They already are. But if you…

I think there's a means-ends thing going on here. Everything you say here is very plausible.

The problem with Wokeism (a term I don't like btw) is the means. We all broadly agree on the ends.

The individualist things this type of change can be bottom-up (individual -> group) and the wokeist wants it to be top-down (group -> individual).

In the former case the intuition is that we aren't going to be able to solve the group problem, so starting at the group level is a waste of time and a bit tyrannical. All we can do is empower individuals who, over time, will aggregate and approximately solve the group problem.

I agree however that it has to be both top-down and bottom-up. I think wokeism as ideology of over-reaction, is towards the extreme end of that top-down approach.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#458

Post by jholman »

jvanderbot wrote: post #380
whatshisface wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I'm not close to any NASA missions at all, so this is just my take.

It seems clear that NASA is more happy than not about what SpaceX is bringing to the table. Any model that spins a NASA-vs-SpaceX narrative is confused and wrong. I think that's an agreement with your point.

But when you look at what SpaceX is operating in opposition to, whether it's cost-plus bids, or closed contracts for various launch services, etc etc, NASA has been very much a part of that whole system.

So, my point is, it makes sense to talk about SpaceX's model vs the model of "the NASA/Boeing/Big Government Contractor complex".

Re: Fierce Nerds

#459

Post by raxxorrax »

neilv wrote: post #429
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…

Maybe factors in someone good at something being humble about it includes: * Confidence of not needing to prove something to themselves. * Comfort with their situation, aka not needing to prove something to others -- for practical reasons, separate from validation of own security/insecurity. (In your Bell Labs example, having gotten into there, getting to do the kind of work they want, presumably having sufficient re…

Humility is simply not seen as a virtue in a business environment anymore.

Career coaches teach you how you can get ahead and to be confident.

But having knowledge also means you know about your limits, so your only option is to pretend to know everything.

It can be useful to convince people with low tech literacy of your solution, but I don't think confidence is a good metric. It is basically a dysfunctional form of communication.

Re: Fierce Nerds

#460

Post by raxxorrax »

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…

> Protip: never psychoanalyze anyone! This likely applies even to psychoanalysts.

Underrated advice. Psychoanalytics helps with self reflection, not with reading minds.

I can recommend Erich Fromm "Fear of Liberty" these days, because it describes many dilemma we face today. Might be interesting if you can see some effects he describes in yourself or others.

Psychoanalysis should be eaten with a pack of salt though. I think it vastly more fitting to model behavior than what writers from the field of psychology produce these days, apart perhaps from advertisers.

Post reply on HN