4 ms·

and yet, I can't seem to recall a single fact or statistic with supporting information from Paul Graham's essay. I'm not siding with the author, I agree in par

by auston 18y ago

and yet, I can't seem to recall a single fact or statistic with supporting information from Paul Graham's essay. I'm not siding with the author, I agree in part with Graham's theory, but you're attacking someone for taking a contrary point of view supported with (what may be a best effort in self-conducted) research.

swombat 18y ago
Two wrongs don't make a right... And I still maintain that this is even worse. Paul Graham's article was certainly one of his weakest (though not quite as bad as http://paulgraham.com/prcmc.html http://paulgraham.com/prcmc.html imho), but at least he doesn't claim to be scientific while thumbing his nose at any sort of scientific rigour. Claiming to be scientific while being the opposite is worse than just being non-scientific.