4 ms·

Wow, I've never come away from a HN article embarrassed for the author before. I had expected from the title to see an article explaining why there don't tend

Wow, I've never come away from a HN article embarrassed for the author before. I had expected from the title to see an article explaining why there don't tend to be a lot of famous computer programmers. I was completely unprepared to read a complaint from a guy who thinks he should be famous, yet isn't treated with the deference he thinks he deserves. Yikes! I had to stop after 3 paragraphs.

kiba 16y ago
You must be reading a different essay. I interpret that the author's fame doesn't help the author at all and that fame is a pointless asset.
- jasonkester 16y ago
  Indeed, that would be the case if the author were indeed famous. But he's not. Fame is defined by people knowing who you are, yet this guy's issue is that nobody knows who he is. QED, he's not famous.
  - stcredzero 16y ago
    In that case, most celebrities arguably aren't famous. All people know is a fiction and nobody knows who they are.
- dagw 16y ago
  It could simply be that the author isn't actually anywhere near as famous as he wants to think he is.
- JustAGeek 16y ago
  That's how I understood it, too.
- thetrumanshow 16y ago
  I have always thought that programming fame might be a ticket-punch that you get and then no one questions your abilities from then on. I guess it isn't so. Thanks to the OP for treading this road and reporting back. Maybe this is also true for web-famous entrepreneurs? Anyone ever start a somewhat well-known company that folded and you had to go work for someone else? Did you still have to earn respect from scratch at the new company? Now I think I understand what I've wanted isn't possible. There is no way to prove yourself once-and-for-all. The only solution is to solve the money problem once-and-for-all, and then you never have to bother with proving yourself at a new company again.
  - vessenes 16y ago
    re: "Solve the money problem once-and-for-all". You will still need to prove yourself at a new company if you ever want to produce something again. Life is long; early retirement can be REALLY REALLY long. At some point, you have to do something that you will find meaningful, however rich you are. At that point, you'll have this 'prove yourself' thing coming right back at you. It's easier if you have a track-record of success, but 'proving yourself' is something that everyone is doing, constantly, with their loved ones, their workmates, in a way, even their local barrista. If you want to work with people, you will need to earn their respect, admiration and trust. Being rich eases that path (for some), but it doesn't take away that fundamental truth.
    - evilduck 16y ago
      But if you're financially independent, you can just do whatever gives you meaning; whereas if you're working for someone else, you've got to prove you'll add value in return for your pay. Sadly, programming by itself will very rarely make you financially independent, especially if you're giving away your code.
jhamburger 16y ago
2nd time for me. First was 'Rails is a ghetto'. Same author. I remember thinking "Wow, this guy looks 10 years older than me and I'd be embarrased to have written that when I was 15."

kiba 16y ago

You must be reading a different essay. I interpret that the author's fame doesn't help the author at all and that fame is a pointless asset.

jasonkester 16y ago
Indeed, that would be the case if the author were indeed famous. But he's not. Fame is defined by people knowing who you are, yet this guy's issue is that nobody knows who he is. QED, he's not famous.
- stcredzero 16y ago
  In that case, most celebrities arguably aren't famous. All people know is a fiction and nobody knows who they are.
dagw 16y ago
It could simply be that the author isn't actually anywhere near as famous as he wants to think he is.
JustAGeek 16y ago
That's how I understood it, too.
thetrumanshow 16y ago
I have always thought that programming fame might be a ticket-punch that you get and then no one questions your abilities from then on. I guess it isn't so. Thanks to the OP for treading this road and reporting back. Maybe this is also true for web-famous entrepreneurs? Anyone ever start a somewhat well-known company that folded and you had to go work for someone else? Did you still have to earn respect from scratch at the new company? Now I think I understand what I've wanted isn't possible. There is no way to prove yourself once-and-for-all. The only solution is to solve the money problem once-and-for-all, and then you never have to bother with proving yourself at a new company again.
- vessenes 16y ago
  re: "Solve the money problem once-and-for-all". You will still need to prove yourself at a new company if you ever want to produce something again. Life is long; early retirement can be REALLY REALLY long. At some point, you have to do something that you will find meaningful, however rich you are. At that point, you'll have this 'prove yourself' thing coming right back at you. It's easier if you have a track-record of success, but 'proving yourself' is something that everyone is doing, constantly, with their loved ones, their workmates, in a way, even their local barrista. If you want to work with people, you will need to earn their respect, admiration and trust. Being rich eases that path (for some), but it doesn't take away that fundamental truth.
  - evilduck 16y ago
    But if you're financially independent, you can just do whatever gives you meaning; whereas if you're working for someone else, you've got to prove you'll add value in return for your pay. Sadly, programming by itself will very rarely make you financially independent, especially if you're giving away your code.

jhamburger 16y ago

2nd time for me. First was 'Rails is a ghetto'. Same author. I remember thinking "Wow, this guy looks 10 years older than me and I'd be embarrased to have written that when I was 15."