5 ms·

Good job with the scan. I started reading the book and began to feel rage so I stopped after about 20 pages. Is it the most self-unaware book or just people t

Good job with the scan. I started reading the book and began to feel rage so I stopped after about 20 pages. Is it the most self-unaware book or just people trying their hand at PR?

qsort 2y ago
A little red book full of quotations from the chairman... Where else did I see this?
- woodruffw 2y ago
  I think that's a very explicit, intentional reference.
- thanks_dang 2y ago
  Is it too early to start a first print of paulgraham.com? I want mine signed. I hope the cover is orange.
  - 8f2ab37a-ed6c 2y ago
    Actually you can download the whole thing by using https://github.com/ofou/graham-essays https://github.com/ofou/graham-essays , and then I imagine you can pipe it into pandoc or something of the sort to create a PDF. And then you can send that over to https://www.blurb.com/pdf-to-book https://www.blurb.com/pdf-to-book or similar providers to get it printed. When I attempted this once, I couldn't get the pages to be formatted nicely like a book, and the number of pages I ended up with was close to 1500 or something along those lines, which ends up costing you $100+ to print out with one of these services. However I suspect that if someone were to typeset the essays nicely, it'd be an amazing coffee table book.
com2kid 2y ago
This was 2012. There was still hope and optimism in the tech space. The Internet had helped overturn powerful regimes and given voice to the disenfranchised. There was the idea that person to person public discourse could resolve many societal problems. Smartphones had exploded just 6 years prior and they were already making inroads into traditionally underserved and neglected communities around the world, helping farmers improve yields and young women become self sufficient so they could escape forced marriages. The idea that we could join together and share ideas and make the world a better place isn't a wrong idea, it is just one that got subverted once it was realized that inciting anger in users lead to more usage and thus more ad impressions.
- dgfitz 2y ago
  > There was the idea that person to person public discourse could resolve many societal problems. Nobody thought this.
  - karmajunkie 2y ago
    I hate to break the news to you, but literally millions believed it. There's still more than a (very overprivileged) few who still believe it.
    - dgfitz 2y ago
      Sorry, nobody “educated” believed this.
      - notacoward 2y ago
        That might be the most blatant "no true Scotsman" I've ever seen. Practically out of a textbook. I'm educated. I and hundreds of coworkers at multiple companies still believed it in 2012. You said something that is simply, provably untrue.
        dgfitz 2y ago
        Sure, you’re right. People thought this.
    - com2kid 2y ago
      I still believe technology can be used for good. Diseases get cured every day, more people are able to make art of all kinds than ever before, families can keep in touch all around the world, people with disabilities can use technology to overcome what would have previously been hard limits. It is unfortunate that we have allowed algorithmic social media content to destroy so much, and to allow for targeted ad based services to cause such drastic harm to society. However society pretty much now knows what the root problems are and if there is a will, many of the worst offenders can be legislated away. Remove gacha/lootbox mechanics from games and remove personalized algorithmic social media feeds. It turns out, as a species, it isn't good for us to carry around machines 24/7 that can hit the dopamine center in our brains, or that can deliver targeted outrage on demand. How about all the other stuff though? A connected world where I can play games with people around the globe? Forums that let fans share their love of their favorite media/artist/singer/author. The hundreds of amazing YouTube chefs that have introduced authentic, sometimes hyperlocal, world cuisines to a global audience. The sheer number of in-depth documentaries that are getting made about every possible niche topic now. The independent media organizations that have popped up (Curiosity Stream, Dropout, to name just two). All that stuff is good.
woodruffw 2y ago
I think in 2012, SV startups (and especially social media startups) were still getting high on their own supply: there was a seemingly genuine groundswell belief that unilaterally connecting the world would be a force for good, rather than a mere reconfiguration of powers. (I don't think Zuckerberg himself is a true believer, but I do think that the people who wrote and read this book in 2012 probably believed it. This was the same year as the Arab Spring, after all.)
- junon 2y ago
  Yes, this. I was at Uber in SF around 2016 or so when they did their "pixels and bits" rebrand which felt very similar. It felt very... "we are messiahs"? Most people felt it, only the people with the highest paychecks (or managers) played into it. After hearing the core values of the company thrown around in regular speech so often most people got kind of numb to anything corporate (e.g. "I really like that you're always hustling so hard but I would love to see you do a bit more toe stepping"). I left SF a year or so after that so I wonder if that whole approach has changed in the bigger offices or not. Being in Europe now most people here (most ..) wouldn't play into it I don't think. Retrospectively feels very American. --- EDIT: Actually it's kind of hard to find info on the rebrand now. There's the announcement[0] but that only seems to allude to the weird philosophical aspect of it in the description, which leads me to believe they never published it publicly. > The new Uber brand system is made up of primary and secondary components that tell the story of technology moving the physical world. Today, we're rolling out a new look and feel that celebrates the cities we're in and the technology that brings people what they want, when they want it. It was more than just "primary and secondary components", they had somehow likened people and pixels together and were trying to create some weird (but similar) narrative of "connecting everything through transport" or whatever. I think the idea was that they wanted to start breaking into more verticals, a la UberEATS and whatnot, but I distinctly remember hearing a lot of "what ifs" about freight, air, etc. that I think were mostly fluff chatter to hype up the rebrand. Most people, even internally, hated it it, and shortly after that started monthly, then weekly, then at times daily new public scandals about the company or TK, so many people left shortly thereafter. [0] https://youtu.be/axjXNEordH8?feature=shared https://youtu.be/axjXNEordH8?feature=shared
tokioyoyo 2y ago
For better or worse, social media (I’d even go as far as saying Facebook) has changed the world. As cringey as that book sounds, people loved hopium of early 2010s. Maybe I was young and naive as well, but I also believed that such connections will unite the world somehow.
Underpass9041 2y ago
The amount of retcon in even the first few pages is comical, it comes across as the most tone deaf thing ever.
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tejohnso 2y ago
What's so enraging? A company puts out some propaganda about how wonderfully world changing it is. Not all that unusual or unexpected.
paulddraper 2y ago
Huh? Smiling people drinking Pepsi, oil companies showing sun filtered through cornstalks....what's the difference?
toast0 2y ago
I could never figure out how much of the employee directed propaganda was from people who were doing it ironically and how much was from people who were drinking the Flavor Aid. I don't think I saw any posters about carpooling, but if there were any, reprints of the classic [1] would have fit right in with the rest of the posters. I'm pretty sure I saw this book, but I don't think I saved a copy I don't think they were still printing it when my employer was acquired. Unfortunately, the propaganda doesn't work Page 110 talks about building trust, but what has FB done to earn your trust lately? [1] https://fdr.artifacts.archives.gov/objects/17472/when-you-ride-alone-you-ride-with-hitler?ctx=bfb1c38c-8771-40b5-82a9-d61eaf9c3303&idx=1 https://fdr.artifacts.archives.gov/objects/17472/when-you-ri...
yuliyp 2y ago
I think the way to read it is as a few things: - An artifact intended to try to help solidify a sense of unity of mission and values - Internal cheerleading - A stake in the sand about things which did not fit in with the values. I read this at the time it showed up on everyone's desks (I wish I'd kept it, but I have no idea where it is). Employees naturally rolled their eyes at some of the excessive optimism in some places, but generally it got the ethos right. That some of the boldest statements have fallen by the wayside ("We don't build better services to make money; We make money to build better services", "Build Products around people, not data") is obviously disappointing, but I'd view what it was trying to do in the light of a piece of art that fell short of its goal rather than merely self-unaware. It was never intended as PR. It delivered its message via anecdotes and the experiences of working there, not in any way that would have anywhere close to the same meaning to the broader world.

Good job with the scan. I started reading the book and began to feel rage so I stopped after about 20 pages. Is it the most self-unaware book or just people trying their hand at PR?

qsort 2y ago

A little red book full of quotations from the chairman... Where else did I see this?

woodruffw 2y ago
I think that's a very explicit, intentional reference.
thanks_dang 2y ago
Is it too early to start a first print of paulgraham.com? I want mine signed. I hope the cover is orange.
- 8f2ab37a-ed6c 2y ago
  Actually you can download the whole thing by using https://github.com/ofou/graham-essays https://github.com/ofou/graham-essays , and then I imagine you can pipe it into pandoc or something of the sort to create a PDF. And then you can send that over to https://www.blurb.com/pdf-to-book https://www.blurb.com/pdf-to-book or similar providers to get it printed. When I attempted this once, I couldn't get the pages to be formatted nicely like a book, and the number of pages I ended up with was close to 1500 or something along those lines, which ends up costing you $100+ to print out with one of these services. However I suspect that if someone were to typeset the essays nicely, it'd be an amazing coffee table book.

com2kid 2y ago

This was 2012. There was still hope and optimism in the tech space. The Internet had helped overturn powerful regimes and given voice to the disenfranchised. There was the idea that person to person public discourse could resolve many societal problems. Smartphones had exploded just 6 years prior and they were already making inroads into traditionally underserved and neglected communities around the world, helping farmers improve yields and young women become self sufficient so they could escape forced marriages. The idea that we could join together and share ideas and make the world a better place isn't a wrong idea, it is just one that got subverted once it was realized that inciting anger in users lead to more usage and thus more ad impressions.

dgfitz 2y ago
> There was the idea that person to person public discourse could resolve many societal problems. Nobody thought this.
- karmajunkie 2y ago
  I hate to break the news to you, but literally millions believed it. There's still more than a (very overprivileged) few who still believe it.
  - dgfitz 2y ago
    Sorry, nobody “educated” believed this.
    - notacoward 2y ago
      That might be the most blatant "no true Scotsman" I've ever seen. Practically out of a textbook. I'm educated. I and hundreds of coworkers at multiple companies still believed it in 2012. You said something that is simply, provably untrue.
      - dgfitz 2y ago
        Sure, you’re right. People thought this.
  - com2kid 2y ago
    I still believe technology can be used for good. Diseases get cured every day, more people are able to make art of all kinds than ever before, families can keep in touch all around the world, people with disabilities can use technology to overcome what would have previously been hard limits. It is unfortunate that we have allowed algorithmic social media content to destroy so much, and to allow for targeted ad based services to cause such drastic harm to society. However society pretty much now knows what the root problems are and if there is a will, many of the worst offenders can be legislated away. Remove gacha/lootbox mechanics from games and remove personalized algorithmic social media feeds. It turns out, as a species, it isn't good for us to carry around machines 24/7 that can hit the dopamine center in our brains, or that can deliver targeted outrage on demand. How about all the other stuff though? A connected world where I can play games with people around the globe? Forums that let fans share their love of their favorite media/artist/singer/author. The hundreds of amazing YouTube chefs that have introduced authentic, sometimes hyperlocal, world cuisines to a global audience. The sheer number of in-depth documentaries that are getting made about every possible niche topic now. The independent media organizations that have popped up (Curiosity Stream, Dropout, to name just two). All that stuff is good.

woodruffw 2y ago

I think in 2012, SV startups (and especially social media startups) were still getting high on their own supply: there was a seemingly genuine groundswell belief that unilaterally connecting the world would be a force for good, rather than a mere reconfiguration of powers. (I don't think Zuckerberg himself is a true believer, but I do think that the people who wrote and read this book in 2012 probably believed it. This was the same year as the Arab Spring, after all.)

junon 2y ago
Yes, this. I was at Uber in SF around 2016 or so when they did their "pixels and bits" rebrand which felt very similar. It felt very... "we are messiahs"? Most people felt it, only the people with the highest paychecks (or managers) played into it. After hearing the core values of the company thrown around in regular speech so often most people got kind of numb to anything corporate (e.g. "I really like that you're always hustling so hard but I would love to see you do a bit more toe stepping"). I left SF a year or so after that so I wonder if that whole approach has changed in the bigger offices or not. Being in Europe now most people here (most ..) wouldn't play into it I don't think. Retrospectively feels very American. --- EDIT: Actually it's kind of hard to find info on the rebrand now. There's the announcement[0] but that only seems to allude to the weird philosophical aspect of it in the description, which leads me to believe they never published it publicly. > The new Uber brand system is made up of primary and secondary components that tell the story of technology moving the physical world. Today, we're rolling out a new look and feel that celebrates the cities we're in and the technology that brings people what they want, when they want it. It was more than just "primary and secondary components", they had somehow likened people and pixels together and were trying to create some weird (but similar) narrative of "connecting everything through transport" or whatever. I think the idea was that they wanted to start breaking into more verticals, a la UberEATS and whatnot, but I distinctly remember hearing a lot of "what ifs" about freight, air, etc. that I think were mostly fluff chatter to hype up the rebrand. Most people, even internally, hated it it, and shortly after that started monthly, then weekly, then at times daily new public scandals about the company or TK, so many people left shortly thereafter. [0] https://youtu.be/axjXNEordH8?feature=shared https://youtu.be/axjXNEordH8?feature=shared

tokioyoyo 2y ago

For better or worse, social media (I’d even go as far as saying Facebook) has changed the world. As cringey as that book sounds, people loved hopium of early 2010s. Maybe I was young and naive as well, but I also believed that such connections will unite the world somehow.

Underpass9041 2y ago

The amount of retcon in even the first few pages is comical, it comes across as the most tone deaf thing ever.

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

tejohnso 2y ago

What's so enraging? A company puts out some propaganda about how wonderfully world changing it is. Not all that unusual or unexpected.

paulddraper 2y ago

Huh? Smiling people drinking Pepsi, oil companies showing sun filtered through cornstalks....what's the difference?

toast0 2y ago

I could never figure out how much of the employee directed propaganda was from people who were doing it ironically and how much was from people who were drinking the Flavor Aid. I don't think I saw any posters about carpooling, but if there were any, reprints of the classic [1] would have fit right in with the rest of the posters. I'm pretty sure I saw this book, but I don't think I saved a copy I don't think they were still printing it when my employer was acquired. Unfortunately, the propaganda doesn't work Page 110 talks about building trust, but what has FB done to earn your trust lately? [1] https://fdr.artifacts.archives.gov/objects/17472/when-you-ride-alone-you-ride-with-hitler?ctx=bfb1c38c-8771-40b5-82a9-d61eaf9c3303&idx=1 https://fdr.artifacts.archives.gov/objects/17472/when-you-ri...

yuliyp 2y ago

I think the way to read it is as a few things: - An artifact intended to try to help solidify a sense of unity of mission and values - Internal cheerleading - A stake in the sand about things which did not fit in with the values. I read this at the time it showed up on everyone's desks (I wish I'd kept it, but I have no idea where it is). Employees naturally rolled their eyes at some of the excessive optimism in some places, but generally it got the ethos right. That some of the boldest statements have fallen by the wayside ("We don't build better services to make money; We make money to build better services", "Build Products around people, not data") is obviously disappointing, but I'd view what it was trying to do in the light of a piece of art that fell short of its goal rather than merely self-unaware. It was never intended as PR. It delivered its message via anecdotes and the experiences of working there, not in any way that would have anywhere close to the same meaning to the broader world.