3 ms·

We are on Hacker News, aren't we? Most people here value the material world more then the spiritual world. This doesn't mean they completely ignore the latter,

We are on Hacker News, aren't we? Most people here value the material world more then the spiritual world. This doesn't mean they completely ignore the latter, of course. But between discussing spirituality and creating something, I'd say most would choose creating. As for making money, this is how our success is measured. Yes, you can do things for your soul, of for your friends, or for your family or for the society at large, but to be an entrepreneur means to accept to be judged, indeed, to judge yourself by your material success: money. It is not an easy thing to do. Money does not lie to you, does not tell you you're ok as you are now, that things will be better or that it will love you no matter what. Failure is clear to see, and so is success. I probably needn't say it, but all this is worthless if you do not apply complete honesty to your work. Money is not an end in itself, it is the measure of your skill. To steal or cheat in any way makes it useless for this purpose.

abstractbill 18y ago
Most people here value the material world more then the spiritual world ... between discussing spirituality and creating something, I'd say most would choose creating. The urge to create things is very spiritual for me, just fwiw. It doesn't have to be material things either - these days it's mostly software and occasionally robots, and in the past it's been mathematics and music. But I must create things - it's a fundamental part of the person I am.
- jacoblyles 18y ago
  I wish that were me. I try to create because I admire creators. However, the drive to create is not innate to my personality. Rather, it is a struggle. Fortunately, I am learning to hack my personality to drive myself to do what I want. For example, I surround myself with creative people and I work on team projects where a sense of duty will drive me to do good work. But it is hard, and I must trick myself to do what I desire.
  - deleted 18y ago
    [deleted]
old-gregg 18y ago
We are on Hacker News, aren't we? ... [skipped] ... As for making money, this is how our success is measured. No it is not. I love HN, but most people here accept the distorted definition of a hacker. Hacker culture had nothing to do with money, only lately, and PG is partially guilty of this, "hacker" started to associate with "21 year old internet millionaire" in the minds of many.
- pg 18y ago
  PG is partially guilty of this But I've been very explicit about this question: "Great programmers are sometimes said to be indifferent to money. This isn't quite true. It is true that all they really care about is doing interesting work. But if you make enough money, you get to work on whatever you want, and for that reason hackers are attracted by the idea of making really large amounts of money. But as long as they still have to show up for work every day, they care more about what they do there than how much they get paid for it." (http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html) "So no, there's nothing particularly grand about making money. That's not what makes startups worth the trouble. What's important about startups is the speed. By compressing the dull but necessary task of making a living into the smallest possible time, you show respect for life, and there is something grand about that." (http://www.paulgraham.com/startuplessons.html http://www.paulgraham.com/startuplessons.html)
  - davidw 18y ago
    Don't you think there's something of an opportunity cost, though? If someone like Linus had dedicated all his time to a startup (he did spend some time at Transmeta, but still had time for Linux), perhaps he would have never accomplished what he did. Perhaps similar arguments could be made about people like Guido van Rossum. Obviously there are various paths to success, but how many people made their cash, and then went on to do a seriously successful open source project? I'm sure there are one or two out there, but I think mostly it's a one or the other situation.
    - lacker 18y ago
      Bill Joy founded both Sun and Vi. Both making a lot of money and doing a "seriously successful" open source project are pretty rare, so even if the two are independent, you shouldn't expect many people to succeed at both of them.

abstractbill 18y ago

Most people here value the material world more then the spiritual world ... between discussing spirituality and creating something, I'd say most would choose creating. The urge to create things is very spiritual for me, just fwiw. It doesn't have to be material things either - these days it's mostly software and occasionally robots, and in the past it's been mathematics and music. But I must create things - it's a fundamental part of the person I am.

jacoblyles 18y ago
I wish that were me. I try to create because I admire creators. However, the drive to create is not innate to my personality. Rather, it is a struggle. Fortunately, I am learning to hack my personality to drive myself to do what I want. For example, I surround myself with creative people and I work on team projects where a sense of duty will drive me to do good work. But it is hard, and I must trick myself to do what I desire.
- deleted 18y ago
  [deleted]

old-gregg 18y ago

We are on Hacker News, aren't we? ... [skipped] ... As for making money, this is how our success is measured. No it is not. I love HN, but most people here accept the distorted definition of a hacker. Hacker culture had nothing to do with money, only lately, and PG is partially guilty of this, "hacker" started to associate with "21 year old internet millionaire" in the minds of many.

pg 18y ago
PG is partially guilty of this But I've been very explicit about this question: "Great programmers are sometimes said to be indifferent to money. This isn't quite true. It is true that all they really care about is doing interesting work. But if you make enough money, you get to work on whatever you want, and for that reason hackers are attracted by the idea of making really large amounts of money. But as long as they still have to show up for work every day, they care more about what they do there than how much they get paid for it." (http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html http://www.paulgraham.com/gh.html) "So no, there's nothing particularly grand about making money. That's not what makes startups worth the trouble. What's important about startups is the speed. By compressing the dull but necessary task of making a living into the smallest possible time, you show respect for life, and there is something grand about that." (http://www.paulgraham.com/startuplessons.html http://www.paulgraham.com/startuplessons.html)
- davidw 18y ago
  Don't you think there's something of an opportunity cost, though? If someone like Linus had dedicated all his time to a startup (he did spend some time at Transmeta, but still had time for Linux), perhaps he would have never accomplished what he did. Perhaps similar arguments could be made about people like Guido van Rossum. Obviously there are various paths to success, but how many people made their cash, and then went on to do a seriously successful open source project? I'm sure there are one or two out there, but I think mostly it's a one or the other situation.
  - lacker 18y ago
    Bill Joy founded both Sun and Vi. Both making a lot of money and doing a "seriously successful" open source project are pretty rare, so even if the two are independent, you shouldn't expect many people to succeed at both of them.