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

What I Didn't Say

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 601 posts

Re: What I Didn't Say

#141

Post by throwaway135 »

crassus wrote: post #139
throwaway135 wrote: post #80

Why is adding more women to the tech industry automatically assumed a laudable goal to throw resources behind? I'm Middle-Eastern (probably a smaller minority in the North-American tech scene compared to women), and while I (like most people) would certainly like to be surrounded by more of my brethren, it's not something I'd be comfortable spending resources on because the return on investment is so nebulous; divers…

I wonder if part of it is that hackers look down on female-dominated lines of work. We imagine that being like us is the best thing in the world. It is a decent line of work, mind you, but it has its downsides and not everybody is cut out for it.

I think many in the tech community do look down on other professions. All the support for 'women in code' programs indicates that.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#142

Post by theorique »

jug6ernaut wrote: post #66

"I was explaining the distinction between a CS major and a hacker..." "What I was talking about here is the idea that to do something well you have to be interested in it for its own sake, not just because you had to pick something as a major.So this is the message to take away: If you want to be really good at programming, you have to love it for itself. " Labeling "CS major"'s as non hackers, good to know as someon…

You can major in CS without being a hacker, and you can be a hacker without majoring in CS.

Many, many hackers enter CS programs precisely because they are hackers and want to learn more about computers. Others take a different path.

Some people in CS aren't into it because they love it, but because their parents want them to get a "useful" degree, or because they heard that they can get a good job. All reasonable motivations, but different from doing something due to intrinsic motivation.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#143

Post by calibraxis »

yawn wrote: post #26

Jakob Kaplan Moss owes PG a public apology for his behavior. The witch hunt tweets that were coming out of him without getting the facts straight are downright disheartening.

So far seems he hasn't; he's explained why, and all the more power to him.

BTW, I'm disappointed that only "witch hunt" (terrorism against women) is used in this particular thread so far. Where's "lynch mob" and "McCarthyism", to round out the irony trifecta? (Hilariously sick when men liken themselves to women, whites to blacks, and capitalists to communists.)

Re: What I Didn't Say

#144

Post by sp332 »

marquis wrote: post #123
sp332 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

blind applications would make me more comfortable to consider applying What kind of pressure are you feeling about applying to funds now?

The pressure of not being a 25 year old guy, basically. Or 25 for that matter.

What would make you feel more comfortable?

Edit: Is this a bad question? I was trying to be empathetic.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#145

Post by ChrisNorstrom »

rcfox wrote: post #109
ChrisNorstrom wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"I appreciate pg stepping up to say something about women in tech." "Do at least one application cycle completely blind." Sorry but this comes off as insulting (I know that wasn't your intention), you applaud and agree with him then turn around and pull a "but I still don't trust you". As if PG can't be trusted, or you think that he's secretly sexist and want him to change his successful interview process just to pro…

> as if PG can't be trusted Just because we're in pg's house, it doesn't mean we have to treat him like a god. He's a fallible human being, just like the rest of us. The whole point of a blind interview is to prevent implicit bias that the bearer might not even be aware of.

Paul Graham is assumed guilty of being sexist and he's probably unaware of it. Got it.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#146

Post by forgottenpaswrd »

It is very interesting see someone like PG take the bait with anti ethical journalism.

I have some friends in top positions and the first thing they learn is about this techniques. There are predators out there wanting to eat your hardly earned reputation for their own benefit or agendas.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#147

Post by theorique »

spindritf wrote: post #11
tomasien wrote: post #7

Are you still going to write about women founders? I 100% take you on your word about all of this, but that I still think a lot of the things you said were off the mark in understandable but important ways[1]. You're obviously well meaning and thoughtful and I think it would be great to read more about your thoughts, although I know you'd prefer to avoid the shitstorm that would follow (no matter how well reasoned yo…

There are no gatekeepers in the startup culture. How would that even work? Would pg deny you a business license? Stop you from getting a VPS? Remotely invalidate your copy of The Art of Computer Programming?

No one can tell you "your startup sucks and you can't do it", but there are ways to exponentially improve your chances of growth and success.

YC is one of those ways, arguably a very significant one.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#148

Post by ericabiz »

ajju wrote: post #98
ericabiz wrote: post #32

As a female founder, I think this is a well-thought-out, articulate response, and I appreciate pg stepping up to say something about women in tech. In a similar vein, I'd love to see YC take on one or both of the following: 1) Do at least one application cycle completely blind. How could you accomplish this? Much like in the concert auditions where this was first tried, put people behind a curtain--and then use techn…

Erica, genuine question: Did you reach out to any female founders who went through YC to ask about their experience?

The straight answer is no. Here's a slightly longer version of the story, in case you're curious:

I first met pg at SXSW several years ago, when he was swamped by hungry startup founders. The whole scene was intimidating to me--I hate crowds! I finally got to ask him a question, which I can't recall the exact content of now, but was something about women and YC. He suggested I email Jessica about it. I didn't do that--probably because I had been intimidated, and partly because I felt like he had punted on the question instead of giving me an actual answer (I now know that this was just part of his characteristic bluntness, and I definitely don't hold it against him especially given the environment in which the conversation happened, but at the time I didn't know pg and I found it offputting.)

Since then, I've had two good friends go through YC, both young white males. One of the companies is now "Internet famous" and shows up here on HN on a regular basis. The other one is still completely underground. Both of them enjoyed and recommended YC.

Another fellow entrepreneur here in Austin went through YC recently and we sat down and compared notes after he went through YC and I went through Techstars. Our conclusion: Techstars wins in terms of mentoring and support, but YC wins in terms of visibility and fundraising.

So, tl;dr I've met pg (briefly), I know one of the partners and a handful of YC founders, but they're not female. I didn't specifically seek out female founders who'd gone through YC, though now that you ask, I'm really curious to hear some of their viewpoints!

Re: What I Didn't Say

#149

Post by ceejayoz »

crazygringo wrote: post #63
ericabiz wrote: post #32

As a female founder, I think this is a well-thought-out, articulate response, and I appreciate pg stepping up to say something about women in tech. In a similar vein, I'd love to see YC take on one or both of the following: 1) Do at least one application cycle completely blind. How could you accomplish this? Much like in the concert auditions where this was first tried, put people behind a curtain--and then use techn…

Blind applications would be great if they were possible, but I suspect they would be as helpful as a blind audition for concert conductors -- i.e., not at all. When you evaluate a team, you need to be able to judge their confidence, see how they interact with each other, get a feel for the trustworthiness, the way they look at you when they answer a question, and so on. If you can't see them, and their voice is disto…

> Blind applications would be great if they were possible, but I suspect they would be as helpful as a blind audition for concert conductors -- i.e., not at all.

While I agree that blind applications would be somewhat tough for startup founders, conducting seems like a bad example. You could fairly easily judge the resulting music without being able to see the conductor.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#150

Post by dkural »

Dear Paul,

In your arc article: http://www.paulgraham.com/arc0.html

you have the following few sentences: I realize that supporting only Ascii is uninternational to a point that's almost offensive, like calling Beijing Peking, or Roma Rome (hmm, wait a minute). But the kind of people who would be offended by that wouldn't like Arc anyway.

Here's the issue: "the kind of people who would be offended by that" - I realize that "that" refers to ASCII only support, and I agree with your statement. But it took me two minutes to figure that out. Indeed "that" might as well refer to Chinese people being offended by the colonial label of Peking instead of using Beijing. I thought you might want to fix this infelicity of expression.

Post reply on HN