7 ms·

Preface: I like Paul Graham’s work generally, not amazing but good (in particular his Lisp books). He has a gift of writing in an inspirational style, which I b

Preface: I like Paul Graham’s work generally, not amazing but good (in particular his Lisp books). He has a gift of writing in an inspirational style, which I believe many enjoyed when reading his essays. He and his colleagues had a brilliant idea and execution when it came to ycombinator, and anybody who’s successful has done a lot more work behind the scenes that we would be aware of (in true HN fashion, we would say we could code up Viaweb in a day and it was right time, right place; but it’s hardly that simple and a huge disservice to their intelligence and hard work). That is to say, I’m not a hater by any regards. But there is little of substance in this article. It’s not an exaggeration that the whole article could be summarized by one line: “Haters, like fanboys, are likely to be obsessive and should be ignored”. And given it’s been reviewed by the following, it seems like they all are so detached from reality that they cannot objectively provide meaningful feedback to the article. > Thanks to Austen Allred, Trevor Blackwell, Patrick Collison, Christine Ford, Daniel Gackle, Jessica Livingston, Robert Morris, Elon Musk, Harj Taggar, and Peter Thiel for reading drafts of this. In my own analysis side, perhaps the article, being devoid of meaningful content, is more telling of the author and his peers - the use of third person, the constant mentions of fame and celebrity status and perhaps the preoccupation with haters (why else write an article) may be an indication that they are becoming caught in their own celebrity worship. It seems a celebrity worship culture continues to accelerate within mainstream conscious (Elon Musk’s tweets moving market prices for example), perhaps amplified by the scale offered by technology and the explosion of digital communication in the last 20-30 years. There will always be inequality, but I believe from basic scientific principles, the differences between so called “visionaries” and “leaders” is not that much vs the broader population and that more equality, more “biodiversity” or spreading of opportunities for intellectual and practical contributions vs. a top down “here’s what’s good for you” approach is undeniably good sense and one we should actively aim for. I.e. less attention / admiration of those at the top and more mutual respect and community building. Fight for more decentralization and peer to peer solutions - the best voice is everybody’s voice!

Sebb767 5y ago
> But there is little of substance in this article. It’s not an exaggeration that the whole article could be summarized by one line: “Haters, like fanboys, are likely to be obsessive and should be ignored”. The article does have more substance, for example exploring where the hate comes from. Of course, it does not seem relevant to you, because all you see from haters is a bit of flaming on forums. For famous people, this is a big pain point and worth the many words. > And given it’s been reviewed by the following, it seems like they all are so detached from reality that they cannot objectively provide meaningful feedback to the article. These are exactly the people having the problem! It's like calling someone to black to talk about discrimination against black people. This is very much a problem only these people get to feel the full extent of.
- abhinav22 5y ago
  > The article does have more substance, for example exploring where the hate comes from. Of course, it does not seem relevant to you, because all you see from haters is a bit of flaming on forums. For famous people, this is a big pain point and worth the many words. Actually you are right. It does cover off a bit on the source, and I brushed these points off as “common knowledge”, probably because I’m not affected by it so I assimilated that information when reading the article without attributing more value to it. I still think it’s devoid of meaningful information, but that’s just a personal view on it, I can now further appreciate that it’s not a decisive “this is a bad article” to “others may take a different view on it”.
- II2II 5y ago
  > The article does have more substance, for example exploring where the hate comes from. This is where the article lacks substance. It is mostly conjecture based upon attributed motivations. The article would have been much better, in my opinion, if it stuck to noting the similarities between fanboys and haters, noting why haters don't really matter, and making suggestions on the handling of haters.
simonh 5y ago
Are you and I the target audience though? I suspect that for people who have significant numbers of fanboys and haters, and for whom this is a constant issue, a carefully thought out and well reasoned article on the subject might be more useful.
- latexr 5y ago
  > a carefully thought out and well reasoned article Which this isn’t. Perhaps he did spend years reflecting on haters, but I agree with the grandparent post that his conclusions amount to little more than a few words.
- abhinav22 5y ago
  It’s a valid point, and I wouldn’t be able to assume what Pg’s target audience is. Unfortunately I missed out anything substantive, perhaps I didn’t comprehend the main points of the article as there are two replies (including yours) noting there is more to the essay than my read picked up on.
fnord77 5y ago
monetizing narcissism. celebrities are a pathological artifact of humanity
tomhoward 5y ago
If the validity of your point relies very much on this: given it’s been reviewed by the following, it seems like they all are so detached from reality that they cannot objectively provide meaningful feedback ...you're not on very solid ground. Austen Allred was living out of his car and showering at the YMCA just a few years ago. Patrick Collision is from an ordinary family in Ireland, and Harj Taggar is from an ordinary family in England. Daniel Gackle is a humble employee of YC, and is routinely attacked in the course of doing his job. Even Trevor Blackwell, Jessica Livingston, Robert Morris and PG were "ordinary" people until having success with Viaweb (except JL) and then YC, not all that long ago. So they all know what it's like to be nobodies trying their best against all odds, even if they (at least some of them) are not in that place any more. As for this: the best voice is everybody’s voice True this may be, but perhaps the most important difference between those who make a big impact and the rest of us the ability to be undeterred by the reflexive hate we inevitably attract when we use our voice to share something novel. With this in mind, perhaps the key to benefiting from more people's creative energy is to dial down the hate and be more encouraging towards anyone who is attempting to make a valuable difference.
- geofft 5y ago
  You know a lot about these people's personal lives! I think that means you're a "fanboy" and if I understand TFA right, I think that means you can be dismissed out of hand?
  - tomhoward 5y ago
    I was in a YC-funded startup many years ago (which didn't make it big), so some of those people have been investors/mentors, some are personal acquaintances/friends, and the others have stories that are well-known to anyone in YC.
- abhinav22 5y ago
  > ..you're not on very solid ground. (Sorry not quoting the entire point, not out of rudeness but due to its length). My point rather was that they are all successful and similar to Paul, so during their review they didn’t pick up on (in my opinion) the lack of content in the essay, which may be a reflection they are caught among themselves and not objectively evaluating each other - this could imply a greater predisposition to label criticism as “haters”. > With this in mind, perhaps the key to benefiting from more people's creative energy is to dial down the hate and be more encouraging towards anyone who is attempting to make a valuable difference. Agree 100%. There’s nothing positive that comes from hate, even criticism should only be provided if it has a chance of actually improving the end product (otherwise it could just be hate hiding as criticism), otherwise what’s the point of criticizing?
nachexnachex 5y ago
In my case, it helped me make the connection hater = - fanboy, which is pretty obvious now having read it (an probably was obvious to many), but I hadn't ever seen it laid out so plainly. On this regard the article was illuminating to me -- granted if you consider the fact obvious, it's not. I probably never would have made it on my own since I don't deal with either and it's not a problem I suffer, in a way anybody with a different point of view can teach us some, even if they were detached.
whatever_dude 5y ago
PG went too far off the deep end and is now living a bubble of his own. From his perspective, everyone who doesn't buy into his wisdom is likely a hater. Success becomes its own kind of blindness.

Sebb767 5y ago

> But there is little of substance in this article. It’s not an exaggeration that the whole article could be summarized by one line: “Haters, like fanboys, are likely to be obsessive and should be ignored”. The article does have more substance, for example exploring where the hate comes from. Of course, it does not seem relevant to you, because all you see from haters is a bit of flaming on forums. For famous people, this is a big pain point and worth the many words. > And given it’s been reviewed by the following, it seems like they all are so detached from reality that they cannot objectively provide meaningful feedback to the article. These are exactly the people having the problem! It's like calling someone to black to talk about discrimination against black people. This is very much a problem only these people get to feel the full extent of.

abhinav22 5y ago
> The article does have more substance, for example exploring where the hate comes from. Of course, it does not seem relevant to you, because all you see from haters is a bit of flaming on forums. For famous people, this is a big pain point and worth the many words. Actually you are right. It does cover off a bit on the source, and I brushed these points off as “common knowledge”, probably because I’m not affected by it so I assimilated that information when reading the article without attributing more value to it. I still think it’s devoid of meaningful information, but that’s just a personal view on it, I can now further appreciate that it’s not a decisive “this is a bad article” to “others may take a different view on it”.
II2II 5y ago
> The article does have more substance, for example exploring where the hate comes from. This is where the article lacks substance. It is mostly conjecture based upon attributed motivations. The article would have been much better, in my opinion, if it stuck to noting the similarities between fanboys and haters, noting why haters don't really matter, and making suggestions on the handling of haters.

simonh 5y ago

Are you and I the target audience though? I suspect that for people who have significant numbers of fanboys and haters, and for whom this is a constant issue, a carefully thought out and well reasoned article on the subject might be more useful.

latexr 5y ago
> a carefully thought out and well reasoned article Which this isn’t. Perhaps he did spend years reflecting on haters, but I agree with the grandparent post that his conclusions amount to little more than a few words.
abhinav22 5y ago
It’s a valid point, and I wouldn’t be able to assume what Pg’s target audience is. Unfortunately I missed out anything substantive, perhaps I didn’t comprehend the main points of the article as there are two replies (including yours) noting there is more to the essay than my read picked up on.

fnord77 5y ago

monetizing narcissism. celebrities are a pathological artifact of humanity

tomhoward 5y ago

If the validity of your point relies very much on this: given it’s been reviewed by the following, it seems like they all are so detached from reality that they cannot objectively provide meaningful feedback ...you're not on very solid ground. Austen Allred was living out of his car and showering at the YMCA just a few years ago. Patrick Collision is from an ordinary family in Ireland, and Harj Taggar is from an ordinary family in England. Daniel Gackle is a humble employee of YC, and is routinely attacked in the course of doing his job. Even Trevor Blackwell, Jessica Livingston, Robert Morris and PG were "ordinary" people until having success with Viaweb (except JL) and then YC, not all that long ago. So they all know what it's like to be nobodies trying their best against all odds, even if they (at least some of them) are not in that place any more. As for this: the best voice is everybody’s voice True this may be, but perhaps the most important difference between those who make a big impact and the rest of us the ability to be undeterred by the reflexive hate we inevitably attract when we use our voice to share something novel. With this in mind, perhaps the key to benefiting from more people's creative energy is to dial down the hate and be more encouraging towards anyone who is attempting to make a valuable difference.

geofft 5y ago
You know a lot about these people's personal lives! I think that means you're a "fanboy" and if I understand TFA right, I think that means you can be dismissed out of hand?
- tomhoward 5y ago
  I was in a YC-funded startup many years ago (which didn't make it big), so some of those people have been investors/mentors, some are personal acquaintances/friends, and the others have stories that are well-known to anyone in YC.
abhinav22 5y ago
> ..you're not on very solid ground. (Sorry not quoting the entire point, not out of rudeness but due to its length). My point rather was that they are all successful and similar to Paul, so during their review they didn’t pick up on (in my opinion) the lack of content in the essay, which may be a reflection they are caught among themselves and not objectively evaluating each other - this could imply a greater predisposition to label criticism as “haters”. > With this in mind, perhaps the key to benefiting from more people's creative energy is to dial down the hate and be more encouraging towards anyone who is attempting to make a valuable difference. Agree 100%. There’s nothing positive that comes from hate, even criticism should only be provided if it has a chance of actually improving the end product (otherwise it could just be hate hiding as criticism), otherwise what’s the point of criticizing?

nachexnachex 5y ago

In my case, it helped me make the connection hater = - fanboy, which is pretty obvious now having read it (an probably was obvious to many), but I hadn't ever seen it laid out so plainly. On this regard the article was illuminating to me -- granted if you consider the fact obvious, it's not. I probably never would have made it on my own since I don't deal with either and it's not a problem I suffer, in a way anybody with a different point of view can teach us some, even if they were detached.

whatever_dude 5y ago

PG went too far off the deep end and is now living a bubble of his own. From his perspective, everyone who doesn't buy into his wisdom is likely a hater. Success becomes its own kind of blindness.