5 ms·

> Sigh. I am so disappointed in our industry that tools like this even need to exist. But isn't this a valid concern? If we're at a stage that we have a thin c

> Sigh. I am so disappointed in our industry that tools like this even need to exist. But isn't this a valid concern? If we're at a stage that we have a thin client of a thin client we are correct to raise questions. This is Hacker news after all. Why are the SV elites so quick to jump gun and claim victimhood when they face ridicule and criticism? We don't see the mom-n-pop shops that closed operations last week whine in such fashion.

kubanczyk 5y ago
>> I am so disappointed in our industry > isn't this a valid concern? "Valid" is such a low bar. It's supposed to not be mind-bogglingly boring, if there's a bar to pass. And I don't think it qualifies, but that's subjective.
tomhoward 5y ago
> But isn't this a valid concern? If we're at a stage that we have a thin client of a thin client we are correct to raise questions. This is Hacker news after all. "Raising questions" is fine. Using someone's product launch to throw a tantrum and say you "want to quit programming entirely" is not raising questions. The matter of why the web is slow is deep and complex. But I grew up with Windows 3.1, 95, etc, and they could be pretty slow too. All that is peripheral to the fact that Mighty has spent two years working on a product that is one possible remedy to this problem, which people can choose to use if they want to. Nobody has to use it. > Why are the SV elites so quick to jump gun and claim victimhood Most of the objections to this essay seem to paint the act of identifying "haters" as "claiming victimhood" or being unable to handle "valid criticism". The YC partners and top founders all know that valid criticism is healthy and extremely important to listen to. YC's motto is "Make something people want" (they give you a t-shirt with it printed on it when you first walk through the door as a founder). The thing PG says to do more than anything else is "listen to your users". Good investors/founders don't carry a victimhood mentality. If they do, they fail. This essay is about understanding that some of the more extreme critics are not really critics but are "haters" and that where that is the case, it should be recognised, for the sake of the founder's sanity, which is a very precious commodity. Retorting that founders should have a thicker skin about legitimate criticism is not refuting the essay.
- FlyingSnake 5y ago
  I am focusing on Raising questions, whereas you are focusing on the rhetorical quip ("want to quit programming"). It is a well known fact that the web bloat has increased tremendously and instead of addressing this, you're worried about "tantrums". We, the public, can critique anything on this forums in accordance to the hacker spirit. The founders are free to take the feedback or ignore it, but it is not meant for them directly. It seems to me that you're emotionally involved with this topic, but please bear with me, I don't want any founder to be mobbed for their efforts. The general analysis of this thread's comments show that people are not buying PG's simplistic arguments. A startup can have fanboys, haters, detractors, enemies, and many more types of critics but this article ignores that depth, nuance etc and goes on to paint an simplistic binary picture. > " The thing PG says to do more than anything else is "listen to your users"." Ctrl+F 'users' on article: 0 results found
  - tomhoward 5y ago
    I get what you're saying, and I don't much expect to win a debate over this as I know it's just a difference of perspective, but for the record: > I am focusing on Raising questions, whereas you are focusing on the rhetorical quip There is not a single question in that whole comment. It's just anger. "Rhetorical quip" is an interpretation that serves the argument you're trying to present, but it's hardly neutral. > It is a well known fact that the web bloat.... The Mighty team is trying to address the issue of web bloat with a project that took two years, rather than trying to reprogram every website/webapp in the world, which would take somewhat longer. If people have actual practical ideas to share that would address the issue of web bloat rather than hating on one's own entire industry and spewing bile over another hacker's product launch, they should 100% share them and it would be great. I'd love to read good ideas on this topic. The comment I quoted didn't contain even an attempt to engage with this issue, it was venting and nothing else. > in accordance to the hacker spirit The hacker spirit I know of entails building things and improving things, and engaging seriously with other people's attempts to do so. The comments in the Mighty thread that do that are great. The ones I quoted/linked don't do that. > you're emotionally involved with this topic A few commenters have written variants of this, but it's deflection. My comments in this thread are mostly correcting factual errors. I'm happy to concede I have a soft spot for Suhail and hackers like him who build things that others think are crazy, because that's how important/difficult problems get solved. So, sure, that's my emotional investment in the topic. The comments I've quoted/linked are far more emotionally-charged than anything I've written. > people are not buying PG's simplistic arguments The emotionally charged, defensive nature of most of the negative comments are interesting, coming from people who are so keen to dismiss others as too emotional, but that aside, this isn't an essay that matters much if HN commenters agree or disagree; it's for people like Suhail and future founders, to help them discern between useful feedback and unhelpful noise. > Ctrl+F 'users' on article: 0 results found Terribly bad-faith comment. "Listen to your users" is the dominant theme of PG's essays and public comments for the 15+ years he's been writing/speaking about startups. Anyway, my central point in my original comment was that we all need to reflect on the role we play when we critique others' work. We can help by engaging seriously with a fellow hacker's work and providing constructive feedback, or we can react with indignation and help them in a different way, by motivating them to prove the haters wrong. Either way we're still helping! It's up to us as to which path makes us feel good about ourselves. If people really think they're living by the "hacker spirit" and offering constructive feedback with those comments I linked, that's fine, good luck to them!

kubanczyk 5y ago

>> I am so disappointed in our industry > isn't this a valid concern? "Valid" is such a low bar. It's supposed to not be mind-bogglingly boring, if there's a bar to pass. And I don't think it qualifies, but that's subjective.

tomhoward 5y ago

> But isn't this a valid concern? If we're at a stage that we have a thin client of a thin client we are correct to raise questions. This is Hacker news after all. "Raising questions" is fine. Using someone's product launch to throw a tantrum and say you "want to quit programming entirely" is not raising questions. The matter of why the web is slow is deep and complex. But I grew up with Windows 3.1, 95, etc, and they could be pretty slow too. All that is peripheral to the fact that Mighty has spent two years working on a product that is one possible remedy to this problem, which people can choose to use if they want to. Nobody has to use it. > Why are the SV elites so quick to jump gun and claim victimhood Most of the objections to this essay seem to paint the act of identifying "haters" as "claiming victimhood" or being unable to handle "valid criticism". The YC partners and top founders all know that valid criticism is healthy and extremely important to listen to. YC's motto is "Make something people want" (they give you a t-shirt with it printed on it when you first walk through the door as a founder). The thing PG says to do more than anything else is "listen to your users". Good investors/founders don't carry a victimhood mentality. If they do, they fail. This essay is about understanding that some of the more extreme critics are not really critics but are "haters" and that where that is the case, it should be recognised, for the sake of the founder's sanity, which is a very precious commodity. Retorting that founders should have a thicker skin about legitimate criticism is not refuting the essay.

FlyingSnake 5y ago
I am focusing on Raising questions, whereas you are focusing on the rhetorical quip ("want to quit programming"). It is a well known fact that the web bloat has increased tremendously and instead of addressing this, you're worried about "tantrums". We, the public, can critique anything on this forums in accordance to the hacker spirit. The founders are free to take the feedback or ignore it, but it is not meant for them directly. It seems to me that you're emotionally involved with this topic, but please bear with me, I don't want any founder to be mobbed for their efforts. The general analysis of this thread's comments show that people are not buying PG's simplistic arguments. A startup can have fanboys, haters, detractors, enemies, and many more types of critics but this article ignores that depth, nuance etc and goes on to paint an simplistic binary picture. > " The thing PG says to do more than anything else is "listen to your users"." Ctrl+F 'users' on article: 0 results found
- tomhoward 5y ago
  I get what you're saying, and I don't much expect to win a debate over this as I know it's just a difference of perspective, but for the record: > I am focusing on Raising questions, whereas you are focusing on the rhetorical quip There is not a single question in that whole comment. It's just anger. "Rhetorical quip" is an interpretation that serves the argument you're trying to present, but it's hardly neutral. > It is a well known fact that the web bloat.... The Mighty team is trying to address the issue of web bloat with a project that took two years, rather than trying to reprogram every website/webapp in the world, which would take somewhat longer. If people have actual practical ideas to share that would address the issue of web bloat rather than hating on one's own entire industry and spewing bile over another hacker's product launch, they should 100% share them and it would be great. I'd love to read good ideas on this topic. The comment I quoted didn't contain even an attempt to engage with this issue, it was venting and nothing else. > in accordance to the hacker spirit The hacker spirit I know of entails building things and improving things, and engaging seriously with other people's attempts to do so. The comments in the Mighty thread that do that are great. The ones I quoted/linked don't do that. > you're emotionally involved with this topic A few commenters have written variants of this, but it's deflection. My comments in this thread are mostly correcting factual errors. I'm happy to concede I have a soft spot for Suhail and hackers like him who build things that others think are crazy, because that's how important/difficult problems get solved. So, sure, that's my emotional investment in the topic. The comments I've quoted/linked are far more emotionally-charged than anything I've written. > people are not buying PG's simplistic arguments The emotionally charged, defensive nature of most of the negative comments are interesting, coming from people who are so keen to dismiss others as too emotional, but that aside, this isn't an essay that matters much if HN commenters agree or disagree; it's for people like Suhail and future founders, to help them discern between useful feedback and unhelpful noise. > Ctrl+F 'users' on article: 0 results found Terribly bad-faith comment. "Listen to your users" is the dominant theme of PG's essays and public comments for the 15+ years he's been writing/speaking about startups. Anyway, my central point in my original comment was that we all need to reflect on the role we play when we critique others' work. We can help by engaging seriously with a fellow hacker's work and providing constructive feedback, or we can react with indignation and help them in a different way, by motivating them to prove the haters wrong. Either way we're still helping! It's up to us as to which path makes us feel good about ourselves. If people really think they're living by the "hacker spirit" and offering constructive feedback with those comments I linked, that's fine, good luck to them!