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

Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 176 posts

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#101

Post by naet »

kethinov wrote: post #2

Since Paul wrote that, people have made so many more things part of their identity, including JavaScript which he points out in the essay was not a particularly identity-charged topic in 2009. With the rise of the frameworks, it has become an identity-charged topic with JS devs now segregated into tribes that insist on using their preferred framework for every webapp they build. It's not about assessing the right too…

I think there's an industry trend or career pressure towards being a member of a JS "tribe". Companies don't believe in people learning new technologies, instead they only want people with lots of experience in their specific framework and nothing more.

I've used React, Vue, Elm, Vanilla JS, and some legacy JQuery in production over my last three years of work (along with Next, Nuxt, Gatsby, Hugo, and many others).

I thought that would make me a well rounded candidate with an understanding of different trade offs and an ability to pick up new things. Now that I'm looking for a new job though it seems like most places are looking to hire someone 100% React dev, and my history of framework diversity has become more of a liability than an asset somehow.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#102

Post by trees101 »

trees101 wrote: post #100

Thought provoking post, but the idea doesn't work. Yes, people are less inclined to get into arguments about specific technical tools if they are not educated about them. Yes, people DO get into arguments about religion even if they aren't educated about it. The difference is that religion addresses matters that ARE central to people's identity. It addresses choices that EVERYONE must make, and therefore everyone has…

There could be a hidden assumption behind Graham's idea, which is that everyone (that matters) shares his beliefs. Often in the West, secular liberalism is the assumed religion and news articles, books, conversations all implicitly assume it. To people completely immersed in this paradigm, religion is merely external decoration, like a costume, that is exterior to an assumed identical core belief.

People who make this assumption got a rude shock around the time of the ISIS attacks, when they found that some people who grew up in French housing estates behaved in extremely strange and troubling ways.

Ideas have consequences, and religion is the set of ideas about the matters of utmost consequence. These ideas are inherently part of people's identity.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#103

Post by nateoearth »

Counterpoint: a strong sense of identity is a crucial ingredient for a meaningful life. Studies have consistently shown that actively religious people are happier that their non-religious counterparts. Identities can grant access to social networks, epitomized in conventions attracting thousands of people who gleefully share an identity (e.g., DEF CON for hackers). Etc.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#104

Post by narag »

fouroneone wrote: post #83
ethanbond wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your ultimate objective should be thriving, ideally for you and as many people and creatures as you can afford to account for. Truth is valuable because since the enlightenment period it has seemed to be extremely valuable in securing thriving. If you instead are picking Truth and Lack Of Bias over, for example, a rich social life, I’d suggest you are putting the cart before the horse. I hope you find your place with…

Oh, It's completely too late for me. I cannot unbelieve what I believe. I already live a life of lies. Nobody knows what I believe and I lie to seem normal and socialize-able. I also don't hold any strong desire to "implement" my beliefs. It's just a perspective.. I am an observer with opinions and I don't care to be any sort of activist. I largely agree with your last post. However it's too late. I no longer believe…

I believe that the answer you seek is in the article. You're too attached to a sick mindset. It's better to stop overthinking and doing something that have more pleasant effects (for you) than writting long-winded comments here. Or maybe not.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#105

Post by naet »

> As a rule, any mention of religion on an online forum degenerates into a religious argument. Why? Why does this happen with religion and not with Javascript...

Unfortunately this is not true anymore for JavaScript. People will get into intense arguments over TS vs JS, React, etc and argue from the same position of "faith" or strongly held beliefs rather than logic.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#106

Post by strangattractor »

fouroneone wrote: post #95
strangattractor wrote: post #90

IMHO I am not convinced that gender identity is actually measurable or a knowable thing. I can physically demonstrate whether I am male or female. I can only assume that I think or feel like other males or females based on how other males or females behave or what they tell me they think and feel. Given the fluidity of language I have no guarantee that my interpretation of that is accurate. I have no real way to do a…

Paul is more talking about pride and identity. He's not talking about full embodiment or awareness of what identity is. I'm going to say an example that's not true but it's just to demonstrate a point. For example if I say "All women are stupid." If you identify as a woman you get offended and emotionally compromised. You assume the person who said it is wrong and you leave. If you don't identify as a woman and you a…

I went to the gender thing primarily because much of the discussion seemed centered on that. But in general I would say my identity is comprised of many more things other than my gender.

By trying to simplify a definition of identity into something specific or plucking out a single identity trait (any trait) which cannot be defined precisely (emacs vs vim, declarative vs functional, race, intelligence, flavor, color etc) we lose information and end up in never ending ratholes of discussion. People start relying on personal experiences and feelings (subjective info) which makes the discussion personal and more often than not useless.

My take from the author is Keep It Simple Stupid.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#107

Post by quickthrower2 »

throw827474737 wrote: post #5
RajT88 wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In tech, people ascribe you an identity as much as you claim one yourself. When I am not around, I have been described to people as "A DevOps guy" or "A Network Guy". People then treat me accordingly. But, being human (or an approximation thereof), I am not just one thing.

Come on, the dentist is also the dentist... taking those titles to personally imo is a too big identitiy to start with. We know you are all individuals ;)

Better analogy might be the soccer midfielder. All playing a similar game but experts in different positions.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#108

Post by philwelch »

mgrthrow wrote: post #78
philwelch wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Queer" is a vague identity with political connotations, by which I mean, the gay people who call themselves "queer" tend to be a lot more woke-leftist than the gay people who don't call themselves "queer". It's absolutely an idea and a constructed identity. The facts of the matter are things like sexual preferences and behaviors, but you don't inherently need to construct an identity around them. On the other hand,…

I think you've both got the right answer and explained it with a very negative framing. Gender and Sexual Minority, LGBTQ+, and queer all describe a largely similar set of folks. Queer arose not from "woke-leftist" spaces, but grew out of 70s and 80s radical gay and trans spaces - groups like the Gay Liberation Front - who were willing to fight back (violently if necessary) against violence and discrimination. Queer…

> Queer arose not from "woke-leftist" spaces, but grew out of 70s and 80s radical gay and trans spaces

I guess "radical" would have been a better choice of terminology than "woke-leftist", but really you're looking at very similar communities that share an ideological heritage and who tend to complain about any terminology people use for them. The term "woke" is new but the basic ideology goes back to 70's radicals as well.

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#109

Post by selimthegrim »

fouroneone wrote: post #91
mch82 wrote: post #58

Alternate advice: practice skills of listening, observing, empathy, dialog, sharing, building. These are the skills you will need to deal with people. People can have a difficult time talking about religion, politics, and programming languages because these issues affect their lives. When you say something that threatens another person’s life, expect a strong reaction to that threat. The key to having productive disc…

There are cases where someones entire life is founded on a lie and that no productive discussion is possible. Sure you can "discuss" these topics amicably but they always end up "agreeing to disagree". Nothing was changed, the needle wasn't moved.. the discussion was useless and unproductive. The truly challenging question here is HOW do you have a truly productive discussion around these topics. Graham is right. The…

Is this not Jungian disintegration/disindividuation?

Re: Keep Your Identity Small (2009)

#110

Post by selimthegrim »

fourfoursix wrote: post #55
ryanklee wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy moly. People cannot escape cognitive biases even by knowing about cognitive biases. This includes you. It seems that you think you have somehow transcended this condition. This is just another bias. And this particular one is maybe the most insidious of all because it convinces you you're better than most on a fundamental level and protects you from introspection and criticism. Seek humility.

How so. I simply said, "consider the possibility." Because scientifically. These are possibilities. Realistic ones in fact. I directly picked them for their controversy. I am aware of the direction they run counter to the norms. Are you aware of your biases? Are you aware how inline with cultural norms and biases that your opinions are? At times, many of these things weren't controversial. How do you know that the cu…

For one example you might want to consider how Asian males are considered in Latin America as opposed to the US (hint: a lot more desirable)
Post reply on HN