3 ms·
You have considered the possibility that there are HNers who disagree with pg, correct?
by j_baker 16y ago
You have considered the possibility that there are HNers who disagree with pg, correct?
- gaius 16y agoYes indeed. But where's your (or Raganwald's) collection of essays on how people should be paid a standard hourly rate regardless of their actual output?
- raganwald 16y agoMy essay justifying paying programmers a standard hourly wage is right next to the place where I wrote words advocating the practice. Since I don't advocate that practice, there is no need for an essay on the subject. I cannot read your mind, but are you making certain assumptions about what I believe based on the fact that I quoted certain sections of the wikipedia article about Socialism? Please keep in mind that my words in this essay are quite explicit in stating that my beliefs are not Big S Socialism. I state that at the top and the bottom.
- gaius 16y agoOK, but the title is "Hello, my name is Reginald and I am a Socialist" (big S) then you go on to make the distinction. So I am confused about what you are actually advocating here. FWIW reading the rest of the comments on this page I guess you'd be more like a syndicalist than a socialist.
- raganwald 16y agoI am prepared to confess to composing a link-baitish title. Shall I pay my upmod to the bailiff on my way out? ;)
- j_baker 16y agoFirst of all, I didn't say that I agree with Reginald. I'm just trying to make sure we can draw the line between respecting pg and hero-worship. If that's not where you're coming from, great! To go back to your previous argument though, I don't view agreeing with pg (or even having read pg) as a pre-requisite to fitting in on HN. Quite the opposite in fact. I think someone who blindly accepts everything that pg writes is likely to not fit in to HN. Perhaps I jumped the gun in assuming that you feel otherwise. In fact, I hope that's the case!
- gaius 16y agoYeah, I just mentioned that as a way of saying, this point about compensation for input (time spent on something) vs output (the value of that something) has been made in great depth already.
- yungchin 16y agoTo be fair, note you're (accidentally) pulling up a subtle strawman: the original quote said "amount of labour", not "hours".
- gaius 16y agoI guess "amount" could mean "lines of code" but my point stands.