71–80 of 100 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think you're misunderstanding him. He's simply pointing out that you said something false: that popularity is evidence that someone is a good writer.
Popularity isn't proof that someone is a good writer, but it certainly is evidence of same.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, clearly we sometimes need to push what is "normal" and create things that people don't yet know they want, but we should be pragmatic about it. For example, Esperanto may be a more "rational" and well designed language, but I'm going to keep using English because that's what works for me. The early cars were "horseless carriages" because that was easier to build and easier for people to relate to, and there's no…
Think about it this way: how much would you respect an artist that had no personal vision or personal style in his work, but just did whatever his clients wanted so that there was no consistent character at all in his art? Can you name any respected artist that works this way? My guess is no. The point here is that for an artist to make authentic art, the work has to be a reflection of that artist's core values regar…
For pure art it may not matter (though I suspect that wealthy artists have adapted to market demands, but won't admit it), but for functional products it matters a lot.
This is sort of an amusing debate, because usually I'm the one pushing to make things more different and unconventional. However, to make changes really take root, you often have to "boil the frog".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not a huge Rand fan but I just thought it was an interesting take on why business folks have adopted her. The philosophy works well with architecture because of "classical" limitations and the power of the individual to evoke change in the modern world. That's a message that any startupper needs even as you're certainly right - we need to iterate with customers in mind. But then, that's our sector. Imagine those craz…
Yes, clearly we sometimes need to push what is "normal" and create things that people don't yet know they want, but we should be pragmatic about it. For example, Esperanto may be a more "rational" and well designed language, but I'm going to keep using English because that's what works for me. The early cars were "horseless carriages" because that was easier to build and easier for people to relate to, and there's no…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Yes, at first I was happy to be learning how to read. It seemed exciting and magical, but then I read this: Atlas Shrugged, by Ayn Rand. I read every last word of this garbage, and because of this piece of shit, I am never reading again." -- police officer Barbrady, South Park (1998) I made it about 1/3 of the way into The Fountainhead but got bored and lost interest. Self-interest is ok, but I'm not going to make i…
"The architect who wouldn't design what people like (because it wasn't rational, as I recall) seemed like a really annoying person to deal with. And I certainly wouldn't want to invest in his startup :)" This one made me laugh a little. What did people want from gmail, Paul? Folders, right? Lots of good folder-related features. Did you give it to them? Nope. You made search work right, threaded the conversations, and…
Gmail definitely contains some compromises, and I'm ok with that. I'd rather have a good product with millions of users than a "perfect" product with zero users (not that perfection is possible anyway).
Is Ayn saying that the individual is more important than the collective, or that the best route to collective improvement is through selfishness? I suspect it's the latter, but Ayn and her followers frame the debate so combatively that it's hard to be sure. I see this confusion rearing its head throughout this page. (I read the first 100 pages of Atlas Shrugged, and got sick of it. I thought it was uninteresting as a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The architect who wouldn't design what people like (because it wasn't rational, as I recall) seemed like a really annoying person to deal with. And I certainly wouldn't want to invest in his startup :)" This one made me laugh a little. What did people want from gmail, Paul? Folders, right? Lots of good folder-related features. Did you give it to them? Nope. You made search work right, threaded the conversations, and…
Yes, I'm not suggesting that you have to deliver exactly what people ask for, but you shouldn't completely ignore it either. I'm basically saying that both extremes are wrong. You need to be both arrogant and humble at the same time. I know what's best, but I might be wrong. :) Gmail definitely contains some compromises, and I'm ok with that. I'd rather have a good product with millions of users than a "perfect" prod…
I agree, and I know you're not as arrogant as a Rand hero. Your post just made me laugh. ;-)
But I'm glad you clarified, because the "I know what's best" sentence could very well be the best thing ever said on News.YC.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are magnificent. To suggest that anyone -not- read them (for the sake of brevity, no less) is to suggest a reader not experience great, life-changing literature. Her objectivist philosophy may be a bit overt in the latter, but never for a second could I sleep well knowing I'd proposed that others -skip- these books.
I advised myself to skip them, and I'm happy so far with that advice.
Yes, I have read both Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged in the last couple of years, and they were viewpoint-changing events for me. They are lengthy, but it was worth the read for me. My key takeaway is that personal freedom and the ability for individuals to focus on their goals with as little artificial interference as possible leads to the greatest societal gain.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I advised myself to skip them, and I'm happy so far with that advice.
PG, this is a very interesting comment to me. The reason I say this is that I cite your article 'Mind the Gap' at www.paulgraham.com/gap.html as a an excellent distillation of the key points of Atlas Shrugged with a bit of a technology focus. I had believed that Atlas Shrugged was an inspiration for this article. I guess I was wrong and you have independently argued a lot of the same concepts. Yes, I have read both F…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I advised myself to skip them, and I'm happy so far with that advice.
PG, this is a very interesting comment to me. The reason I say this is that I cite your article 'Mind the Gap' at www.paulgraham.com/gap.html as a an excellent distillation of the key points of Atlas Shrugged with a bit of a technology focus. I had believed that Atlas Shrugged was an inspiration for this article. I guess I was wrong and you have independently argued a lot of the same concepts. Yes, I have read both F…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
PG, this is a very interesting comment to me. The reason I say this is that I cite your article 'Mind the Gap' at www.paulgraham.com/gap.html as a an excellent distillation of the key points of Atlas Shrugged with a bit of a technology focus. I had believed that Atlas Shrugged was an inspiration for this article. I guess I was wrong and you have independently argued a lot of the same concepts. Yes, I have read both F…
If I'd been summarizing a book of someone else's, I'd have said so.
My point was poorly made. Stated more clearly, in my view, this essay is a work that shares the spirit of a lot of the same lines of thought as AS (though wholly unique in its focus). In addition to this essay being great on its own merits, I recommend this essay to anyone who is interested in getting a flavor of some of the big picture questions AS discusses.