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

I Met Paul Graham Once

okayfail.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 860 posts

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#81

Post by _1tem »

tclancy wrote: post #59
_1tem wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe the world is simply returning to the way it has been for pretty much all of recorded history. Wars, male dominance, two fixed genders, oligarchs and barons and racism is the norm for all human beings since forever. “Wokeness” is a very recent anomaly.

You probably need to read more history, and maybe challenge yourself to find sources, if you think those things were always widely true everywhere.

Even most of the world right now doesn’t care about wokeness and never has. India, the Middle East, Africa, China, Russia etc. never caught on to most woke stuff that came out of the west in the past 20 years.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#82

Post by lisper »

afavour wrote: post #9

In the long run I think realizations like the authors are healthy ones. PG is not a hero. He's just a guy. A guy who entered into business transactions with a number of people, many of whom benefitted greatly (as did Paul himself). I'm not saying any of that as a negative! Just that we have a habit of attributing superhuman characteristics to folks (Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize comes to mind) and ending up dis…

> He's just a guy. A guy who entered into business transactions with a number of people

Unfortunately, that's not true. He is also a well-read and influential essayist. He wields power and influence through his words as well as his money.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#83

Post by watwut »

slibhb wrote: post #41

I thought this was better than most essays in this vein. I do fundamentally disagree with the author. People can think poorly of you for whatever reason they want. If someone hates trans people, they can, and you can't stop them. The whole "war on hate" thing was a bad idea; you can't forbid hatred. It predictably didn't work, and it's good that we're turning away from it. Adding on, the trans issue isn't simple. The…

> There are real questions about bathrooms, women's sports, and when medical interventions are called for.

Yes there are real questions, but there are also real answers. Currently, 99% of people asking questions have literally zero interest in answers. They do not care about what research say or whether there is harm or not. They ask questions to convince the audience about their political project.

They do not care about whether medical interventions are good, bad, safe or unsafe. They want to convince you that that they are unsafe. They want to stop the interventions regardless of their impact. They do not care about safety of bathrooms, they want you to punish transgender people in the wrong bathroom. They do not care about women sports either, in fact they are the same people arguing against women sports whereever it matters.

> People can think poorly of you for whatever reason they want.

And it should be my god give right to call them sexist and racists if they think of me poorly because of those reasons. But somehow that is supposed to be a taboo. We are all supposed to pretend there is no sexism, that there was no historical sexism, so that someone feels good about themselves. Again and again, sjws pointed out someone is sexist/racist, there was an outrage in response, they were painted crazy stupid exaggerating. And I actually believe the response, multiple times. Except that it turned out, multiple times, that they were right all along.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#84

Post by 1970-01-01 »

InsideOutSanta wrote: post #48
1970-01-01 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Will you agree with the author's viewpoint that "none of experience" matters if one is trans?

My reading of the author's viewpoint is that there are a lot of people in leadership positions in the tech world who would have previously recognized the author's talent and supported them, but would now form a negative opinion of them, regardless of their experience. These people would no longer give them the opportunity they gave them previously.

I think good leaders recognize people like the author simply have an additional life burden that they both choose and need to fight against and uphill. Additionally, those fights will ebb and flow unpredictably, possibly becoming too much of a burden for them at unpredictable times. If this is what you mean by negative opinion, then I agree. But I really don't think good leaders will take it out on them personally or hold them back to the point where they choose fighting inner trans issues over their business and success.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#85

Post by 01HNNWZ0MV43FF »

ethbr1 wrote: post #24

Great, cohesive, and clear essay! Hear hear. One thing that I think is underappreciated in our current times, that gets lost on both the left and the right sides -- an individual is more important than their identity . - A specific trans person can also be an asshole. - A specific white man can also be a saint. Extremists on both political sides will scream about the reasons one or the other of those statements is wr…

I'm so tired of hearing "both sides" though.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#87

Post by neom »

ethbr1 wrote: post #38
bryant wrote: post #22

My guess is there are two possibilities as to what's going on: * Many tech pioneers and leaders deep down felt an animosity towards supporting people who didn't fit the mold and finally feel free to express it (the worst-case outcome), and/or * Many tech pioneers and leaders wish to continue supporting those who don't fit the mold but feel their own status threatened by figures with nearly infinite power[0] who disag…

There's also a third type, that I consider to be the most likely reality given self-selected population of founders / successful leaders: - People who will amorally play to the limits of the rules if it helps them win. It doesn't matter what they personally feel, or even if they have feelings at all. They tack with whatever way the wind is blowing in order to derive the maximum benefit. E.g. the million dollar inaugu…

This is lacking a lot of nuance though isn't it? You're basically saying hate the player not the game, and that isn't really useful. When you step up to the arena and decide to play a competitive sport, because of game dynamics you can only know so much about who you are playing against, so you should play. The whole philosophical theory behind capitalism is literally progress emerges from the conflict and tension created between it's functional systems. If you want to get down to blaming humans, you're going to hav to go over to Adam Smiths or Joseph Schumpeter.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#88

Post by spokaneplumb »

natch wrote: post #39
spokaneplumb wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This one’s footnote #2 addresses PG’s definition of “woke”, which I agree is useless (I’d go further: that kind’s so inconsequential that it’s nonsense to bring it up unless you’re using those complaints to attack other actions that do maybe have some justification, using the definition as cover to retreat to if called out; if that’s actually the only part you’re complaining about, just don’t write the piece, everyon…

What is “that kind” referring to? That kind of essay? The first essay? The response essay? That kind of definition? The author? Which author? That kind of person who is aggressively performative? If by “that kind” you mean that last definition, then let’s take one example in that happened recently and address your claim that “that kind” is inconsequential. Undemocratically, performatively, anointing behind closed doo…

> Undemocratically, performatively, anointing behind closed doors a weak but social justice signaling candidate to run on the democratic ticket

You’re just stringing together bingo-card words. I don’t think this is going to be a productive exchange, so I’ll leave things where they stand.

Re: I Met Paul Graham Once

#89

Post by benrutter »

This is a really personal article and I'm really grateful the author shared it. I think too often conceptual terms like "wokeness" and "identity politics" get thrown around without really considering the people underlying those ideas.

It's easy to make snap judgements along the lines of "the world is too woke these days", but a lot harder to argue against peoples ability to live as they choose with basic dignity.

Post reply on HN