11 ms·

A word about credibility. It comes from the Latin word credo, meaning "I trust." Its value exceeds that of money because it marks you as a person - as someone w

by grellas 13y ago

A word about credibility. It comes from the Latin word credo, meaning "I trust." Its value exceeds that of money because it marks you as a person - as someone who is respected, who is trustworthy, and whom you would want to count as a friend. It marks you not as perfect but as special. It makes others ponder not so much that they did the last deal with you but that they would want to do the next deal too. Just as we build credit through many transactions, so we build credibility by the very pattern of our lives. Credit and credibility derive from the same root and signify the same thing: when in doubt, we can trust the one who has either trait. Not blind trust, just a benefit-of-the-doubt level of trust. Well, pg has earned our trust and deserved the benefit of the doubt when something so off kilter as this is attributed to him. He did not get it here, and that is a sad testament to how crowd-inspired frenzies can bend our perceptions in such faulty ways. Let us only hope that we can learn some good lessons from this. pg's response is actually priceless: it is like a soft-spoken witness upending a bullying lawyer who had just viciously attacked him, leaving the attacker reeling for all to see. Indeed, the mob looks pretty much like an ass at this point and kudos to pg for his more-than-able defense. Very lawyer-like, in a way, but far more classy.

mjburgess 13y ago
Fine, he was mischaracterized and he replied. But jesus, > pg's response is actually priceless: it is like a soft-spoken witness upending a bullying lawyer who had just viciously attacked him, leaving the attacker reeling for all to see. What's with the almost cult-like reverence for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur?
- minimax 13y ago
  The guy you're responding to is George Grellas, who is a lawyer. That's probably why he couches it in terms of lawyer and witness.
- wmeredith 13y ago
  It's his website ;)
- wr1472 13y ago
  I haven't read the submission yet, neither am I fully up to speed on the topic, but I'm going to go all meta on you and ask what a pseudo-intellectual is?
  - aaronem 13y ago
    There are two definitions. The first describes one who believes himself to be both intelligent and thoughtful, but fails to recognize his deficiency in at least one of those two habits. The second describes one who is both intelligent and thoughtful, from the perspective of one who fails to recognize his deficiency in at least one of those two traits. Determining which definition is in use, in a given case, is not always straightforward.
- GnarfGnarf 13y ago
  reverence
- jraines 13y ago
  pg's writing has made a big impact among a lot of people, the majority of whom don't view him as a cult-like leader or personality at all. It sounds like you disagree with his ideas; what qualifies someone as an intellectual in your book and not a pseudo-intellectual?
  - mjburgess 13y ago
    "pseudo" was a little strong. But if you have any serious familiarity with his "off-topic" rants, youll see he writes about issues glibly and with a severe lack of information. I dont mind "academic journalism", I do it a lot myself: write on difficult topics for a lay audience and maybe sacrifice a little accurasy a long the way. I think pg likes be seen making points more than he wants further understanding/truth/etc.
    - mjburgess 13y ago
      I seem to have been down-voted, maybe some dont see the problem. Here's a randomly picked example: http://paulgraham.com/inequality.html http://paulgraham.com/inequality.html Randomish quote from end of article, "The problem here is not wealth, but corruption. So why not go after corruption? We don't need to prevent people from being rich if we can prevent wealth from translating into power." Umm... how about in a capitalist society money is the vehicle of positive freedom... to increase ones ability to do something on has to have more money. Therefore under capitalism there is always a fundamental tie between money and power. That's a small off-hand point. But if you have any serious reading on the last two hundred years of economic, political and sociological critiques of capitalism, wealth and power that whole article will just seem silly. I'm sure he means well. But it takes a certain kind of "pseudo"-something to think that this kinda hackney "thought-lite" material should be delivered at a major conference (Defcon 2005). If i were asked, on the back of my reputation, to speak on this, I would at least spend a week watching/reading/etc. as much as I can in the area.
      - ma2rten 13y ago
        I didn't read the essay in question, but from your quote it sounds like you are deliberately misinterpreting his point. He is talking about political power.
- Estragon 13y ago
  It was reverence for his reply, which is indeed quite skillful and restrained.
- jsmthrowaway 13y ago
  You mean like the cult-like reverence for the pseudo-intellectual issues commentary on Twitter and Medium? The people who have less than a decade in the industry but are experts on compensation, ocracies, power dynamics, and psychology? The ones who work at Silicon Valley startups and lecture the entire industry about how things work, then surround themselves with like-minded people to have strength in numbers? You are seeing respect for Paul Graham because, as flawed as some of his opinions might be, he also has the experience backing them. Louis CK said this best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXcWeFn-YYM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXcWeFn-YYM (NSFW in the latter half) If you're under 40, I'm largely uninterested in your take on the world. That includes my own; I know I still have things to learn and I make a proactive effort to listen more than I talk. I don't always succeed.
  - mjburgess 13y ago
    > If you're under 40, I'm largely uninterested in your take on the world. pg isnt peddling his "take on the world". He talks about serious academic topics in a chronically under and misinformed way. My 50 year old plumber knows jack about Metaphysics, Quantum Field Theory or Abstract Expressionism despite - as in a Louis CK bit - his seeing a dead body "one time". If you want to have a fire-side chat with him - be my guest. But I ain't fetching the scribe because he's had a few decades wandering around.
    - coldtea 13y ago
      >My 50 year old plumber knows jack about Metaphysics, Quantum Field Theory or Abstract Expressionism despite - as in a Louis CK bit - his seeing a dead body "one time". Well, most of the stuff guys "under 40" think they know about "Metaphysics, Quantum Field Theory or Abstract Expressionism" are a half-understood mismash too (I'm not talking about someone with a PhD in Physics here). And, as some they will find out later in life, not only knowledge of those "serious academic topics" doesn't matter as much as they thought, but also most of them are inherently bullshit too.
      - mjburgess 13y ago
- aaronem 13y ago
  You confuse respect with reverence, and pseudo-intellectualism with lively intellect; I can't imagine why. Incidentally, your malaprop is showing.
- mojowo11 13y ago
  Most of the reverence for this guy (regardless of whether you find it pseudo-intellectual or not) can probably be explained by the fact that Paul Graham is a co-founder of Y Combinator, and you're on ycombinator.com.
- mattmanser 13y ago
  pg, a pseudo-intellectual? I'm frankly surprised you've been here for 2 years and never realised. You see the ycombinator in news.ycombinator.com? In this website? That's pg's company. Do you know what ycombinator is? That he started the seed funding movement? That he was blogging about hacking startups before people even really realised you could hack startups? Before lean startup existed? That he's written his own dialect of LISP? That he started and sold his own startup in the early days of the web? And that, now this is some serious respect, it was actually written in LISP? That's not cultish, it's earned respect and pg's got it in buckets around here. Crikey. Little drunk, but crikey, talk about having absolutely no fucking clue. The guy's a machine of intellectualism, most things he turns his mind to he de-constructs, encapsulates and then explains brilliantly. Yeah, occasionally he's wrong, especially when he tries to justify certain aspects of exploitative capitalism, but damn he's good. Very good. And that response was classic pg as grellas said.
  - rsl7 13y ago
    pg started the seed funding movement? puh-leeeze.
    - mattmanser 13y ago
      I meant seed accelerator.
  - seiji 13y ago
    That's not cultish I am disinclined to acquiesce to your assertion. Listing accomplishments is okay. Listing accomplishments paired with fawning and idolatry is cultish.
    - mattmanser 13y ago
      disinclined to acquiesce Oh dear. But anyway, given that I actually pointed out I disagree with him in some aspects, how is that fawning? The guy's got a history that reads better than any of us here could probably hope for and he writes some amazingly well thought out and well reasoned essays. I'm don't idolize him, I think he's more intelligent than me. Which I say about very, very few people. I think it's absurd to call him a pseudo-intellectual.
- Jd 13y ago
  pg is a nerd who got rich without being any less of a nerd. He also helps other nerds get rich. Any clue why that would be popular?
- theorique 13y ago
  What's with the almost cult-like relevance for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur? - Founded a successful web apps company back in the 1990s when that wasn't common, and sold it to Yahoo - Founded Y Combinator to advise and invest in startups - Smart investor with substantial success and track record (Dropbox, AirBnB, etc) In other words, he's earned a reputation for doing some very smart things, and documenting them in clear, easily understood language, over the past 20 years. I'm not being a mirer or a nuthugger here. I participate in HN because it benefits me and I learn useful things amidst the noise. (And of course pg started this site too.)
  - coldtea 13y ago
    And was quite prominent in the Lisp community, back in the day too.
    - aerique 13y ago
      That might still be an understatement. He wrote one of the top books for (Common) Lisp: http://www.paulgraham.com/onlisp.html http://www.paulgraham.com/onlisp.html Peter Norvig on the book: http://www.amazon.com/review/RRFAH7G81ASUL/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0130305529&nodeID=283155&store=books http://www.amazon.com/review/RRFAH7G81ASUL/ref=cm_cr_dp_titl...
  - mwilcox 13y ago
    Not to mention his academic qualifications: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(computer_programmer)#Education http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(computer_programme...
  - robg 13y ago
    Indeed, if pg is a pseudo-intellectual, then the word "intellectual" has so little meaning as to be useless. That's not ball washing. That's a comparison to the journalists, academics, writers, editors, analysts, etc etc who aspire to that public identity.
  - ericd 13y ago
    And was one of the first people to use probabilistic methods to fight spam, which is what finally made spam an almost non-issue.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- Ygg2 13y ago
  > What's with the almost cult-like relevance for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur? People worship and idolize their heroes all the time.
- dinkumthinkum 13y ago
  Honestly, this is a troll comment. By making the comment you will assuredly elicit the response you expect, imply, but it is not necessarily for the reason you state. pg was misrepresented and held out as a misogynist. We think highly of pg, why should we not defend what is merely slanderous nonsense? I'm the first one to disagree with many ideas in our echo chamber ... That's healthy. But the idea that pg said anything wrong is ridiculous.
- ajslater 13y ago
  >What's with the almost cult-like reverence for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur? Who, pray tell, are the real intellectuals?
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
- visakanv 13y ago
  I have a problem with the term "pseudo-intellectual". What's an intellectual, and what's a psuedo-intellectual? Please define your terms.
  - ryguytilidie 13y ago
    If you have some sort of actual experience in Philosophy and enter an opinion on a subject relating to Philosophy, that is an intellectual argument. If you are an entrepreneur with no training in Philosophy and enter an opinion on a subject relating to Philosophy that is a pseudo-intellectual argument. Pretty simple really. Note: I don't think that he actually is a pseudo-intellectual, just giving you the example you were asking for.
    - kbenson 13y ago
      Ignoring the fact that it was pointed out elsewhere in the comments that pg has a BA in Philosophy (apparently confirmed by wikipedia), this assumes that someone without training has nothing worthwhile to contribute[1]. While that may end up being true in the majority of cases, I don't think it's valid to apply the term to individuals just because they don't have credentials, in the absence of other evidence. I do like Merriam Webster's definition[2]. 1: I'm not trying to argue with you. You plainly qualified it as a clarification, not a position. I just think your definition falls short in some respects, so thought I would clarify your clarification. :) 2: http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/pseudo-intellectual http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/pseudo-intellec...
      - ryguytilidie 13y ago
        So you knew the answer, but you asked the question anyway? Okay...
        kbenson 13y ago
        I think you are mistaken about something, since I didn't ask any questions.
- benched 13y ago
  largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur Seriously, wtf. What does this even mean when talking about a person, and not a particular essay? Do you honestly not think that Paul Graham embodies a life of the intellect?
- Confusion 13y ago
  It's interesting how people are attacking you for using 'pseudo-intellectual', while completely disregarding the 'cult-like reverence' bit. Your question is just as damning without the 'pseudo-intellectual' adjective, yet they are trying to change that to 'intellectual'. This is a nice demonstration of 'framing': you frame pg as not deserving cult-like reverence because of his 'pseudo-intellectuality' and people respond by explaining how he is a true intellectual. Except that the arguments they give for that assertion are wrong, because that is not the assertion for which they have arguments. Their arguments actually explain why pg is revered and they are now contorted to be arguments that seem to be meant to explain why is he is cult-like revered for his intellectuality. The result is that it seem like people are tacitly acknowledging the 'cult-like reverence' and are giving completely ridiculous arguments in support. The ridiculousness of those arguments is pointed out and we get into pointless discussions about what things mean, completely losing sight of the original point. The bottom line is: pg is revered and reasons for that reverence are given. There is nothing cult-like about the reverence and the pseudo-intellectual part of his writings (I would use another word to describe that quality of the writings, but that is beyond my current argument), are not the reason for the reverence.
  - mjburgess 13y ago
    You're right. I shouldve emphasized the "pseudo" part had more to do with the gap between how people treat him and how he really is.
- sytelus 13y ago
  Go change how an entire industry works, help found more successful startups than you can count on your fingers, pile up few billions while you are also coding a prime destination on web for hackers - and then you too would get a cult-like reverence for your pseudo-intellect.
- richardw 13y ago
  He writes for hackers, not for Nature, his articles take a week, not a year. People like to read his perspective and he's got some street cred. Why does it bother you so much if he has a following? So do sportspeople, businesspeople, graffiti artists. That's ok. It takes very little from your life. Personally I'm glad he takes the time. If you can do better, go for it.
dylandrop 13y ago
Can we lay off the cheesy deification of PG? He was called a sexist, and he responded well. He is not a paragon of society, he is simply someone who is very good at tech and making money. And he is probably a good person too, but come on, this is just silly. On a second note I'm also curious as to what exactly you're referring to when you say he has the credibility that should make us know that he isn't sexist. I'm not saying he is sexist, I'm just saying that all of his credibility lies in making good business decisions, not gender relations.
- reeses 13y ago
  "On a second note I'm also curious as to what exactly you're referring to when you say he has the credibility that should make us know that he isn't sexist. I'm not saying he is sexist, I'm just saying that all of his credibility lies in making good business decisions, not gender relations." I agree. This willful blindness to bias and prejudice because smart people are not biased or prejudiced prevents us from examining our thoughts and behavior.
orionblastar 13y ago
Look you are getting credibility and trust confused with respect and other things. Personally I don't trust anyone, I've been burned too many times. Yeah that makes me paranoid, but it comes from too many bad professional relationships were I was backstabbed by the other person to further their career goals. I must state that this does not happen in every organization, and that there are a few people I would trust if they showed some good faith and helped me out with things. But since nobody I know wants to help me out, and once I reached the age of 40 I get old I am too old for this industry. But PG is worthy of my respect, he has paid his dues in this industry, he knows what he is talking about and has experience, he hasn't backstabbed anyone that I know of so he has credibility, yes he is one of the few that I would trust had he helped me out in some way. Look there is a lot of jealousy in the industry for experienced people. We get called nerds, geeks, dorks, etc by all of the people in other industries. They claim they know how to use a computer, and sure maybe use a Wordprocessor and write on a blog using Wordpress, but every once in a while one of them gets a bad case of jealousy that 'hackers' or 'IT workers' know more than they do, so they lash out and do a hatchet job on someone who got some attention in the media. This is basically politics, and how one person can backstab another. I've had my words taken out of context a lot as well. It is but just one way to backstab someone. It is not just the Internet trolls who do it but the news media and these people writing blogs that hate the startup community. In street terms, these people are 'haters' if I used that term correctly. My sister who got into discoranism calls such people as 'greyfaces' and here is the Urban Dictionary definition. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=greyface http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=greyface You can use either the first or second definition, and it would define the person who did this to PG quite accurately.
- Crito 13y ago
  Do you give people who you respect the benefit of the doubt? By that, I mean that if they say something that could be interpreted charitably or uncharitably, do you tend to tentatively assume that they meant it the charitable way? I think that is what grellas means by "trust".
  - orionblastar 13y ago
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
calibraxis 13y ago
Let's not praise Paul Graham just yet, based solely on his response. The Information's founder Jessica Lessin offered comments like: "We reviewed the transcript again and shared it with Paul. We stand behind our excerpting and editing for clarity. We continue to believe that the quote is in its proper context. Thanks for checking in." (http://valleywag.gawker.com/paul-graham-says-women-havent-been-hacking-for-the-pa-1490581236 http://valleywag.gawker.com/paul-graham-says-women-havent-be...) More importantly, it's not about some beloved leader besmirched by a drive-by interview. The focus is best on YC's track record — and what it'll do to fix it — not a quote/misquote.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
bambax 13y ago
As you observe yourself, PG's credibility didn't work in this case; I'm not sure it ever does. For example, how does the non-credibility of the press work? We all know from experience that the actual business of the press in general is to produce catchy headlines based on a forced interpretation of the "facts" (or based on no facts at all). And yet, we're always ready to trust an article and get all upset as if the press was doing its theoretical job of uncovering some hidden truth (last sentence of PG's post: "even now I'm still fooled occasionally.") Why is that? Why does the press still have any credibility left?

by grellas 13y ago

mjburgess 13y ago

Fine, he was mischaracterized and he replied. But jesus, > pg's response is actually priceless: it is like a soft-spoken witness upending a bullying lawyer who had just viciously attacked him, leaving the attacker reeling for all to see. What's with the almost cult-like reverence for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur?

minimax 13y ago
The guy you're responding to is George Grellas, who is a lawyer. That's probably why he couches it in terms of lawyer and witness.
wmeredith 13y ago
It's his website ;)
wr1472 13y ago
I haven't read the submission yet, neither am I fully up to speed on the topic, but I'm going to go all meta on you and ask what a pseudo-intellectual is?
- aaronem 13y ago
  There are two definitions. The first describes one who believes himself to be both intelligent and thoughtful, but fails to recognize his deficiency in at least one of those two habits. The second describes one who is both intelligent and thoughtful, from the perspective of one who fails to recognize his deficiency in at least one of those two traits. Determining which definition is in use, in a given case, is not always straightforward.
GnarfGnarf 13y ago
reverence
jraines 13y ago
pg's writing has made a big impact among a lot of people, the majority of whom don't view him as a cult-like leader or personality at all. It sounds like you disagree with his ideas; what qualifies someone as an intellectual in your book and not a pseudo-intellectual?
- mjburgess 13y ago
  "pseudo" was a little strong. But if you have any serious familiarity with his "off-topic" rants, youll see he writes about issues glibly and with a severe lack of information. I dont mind "academic journalism", I do it a lot myself: write on difficult topics for a lay audience and maybe sacrifice a little accurasy a long the way. I think pg likes be seen making points more than he wants further understanding/truth/etc.
  - mjburgess 13y ago
    I seem to have been down-voted, maybe some dont see the problem. Here's a randomly picked example: http://paulgraham.com/inequality.html http://paulgraham.com/inequality.html Randomish quote from end of article, "The problem here is not wealth, but corruption. So why not go after corruption? We don't need to prevent people from being rich if we can prevent wealth from translating into power." Umm... how about in a capitalist society money is the vehicle of positive freedom... to increase ones ability to do something on has to have more money. Therefore under capitalism there is always a fundamental tie between money and power. That's a small off-hand point. But if you have any serious reading on the last two hundred years of economic, political and sociological critiques of capitalism, wealth and power that whole article will just seem silly. I'm sure he means well. But it takes a certain kind of "pseudo"-something to think that this kinda hackney "thought-lite" material should be delivered at a major conference (Defcon 2005). If i were asked, on the back of my reputation, to speak on this, I would at least spend a week watching/reading/etc. as much as I can in the area.
    - ma2rten 13y ago
      I didn't read the essay in question, but from your quote it sounds like you are deliberately misinterpreting his point. He is talking about political power.
Estragon 13y ago
It was reverence for his reply, which is indeed quite skillful and restrained.
jsmthrowaway 13y ago
You mean like the cult-like reverence for the pseudo-intellectual issues commentary on Twitter and Medium? The people who have less than a decade in the industry but are experts on compensation, ocracies, power dynamics, and psychology? The ones who work at Silicon Valley startups and lecture the entire industry about how things work, then surround themselves with like-minded people to have strength in numbers? You are seeing respect for Paul Graham because, as flawed as some of his opinions might be, he also has the experience backing them. Louis CK said this best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXcWeFn-YYM http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXcWeFn-YYM (NSFW in the latter half) If you're under 40, I'm largely uninterested in your take on the world. That includes my own; I know I still have things to learn and I make a proactive effort to listen more than I talk. I don't always succeed.
- mjburgess 13y ago
  > If you're under 40, I'm largely uninterested in your take on the world. pg isnt peddling his "take on the world". He talks about serious academic topics in a chronically under and misinformed way. My 50 year old plumber knows jack about Metaphysics, Quantum Field Theory or Abstract Expressionism despite - as in a Louis CK bit - his seeing a dead body "one time". If you want to have a fire-side chat with him - be my guest. But I ain't fetching the scribe because he's had a few decades wandering around.
  - coldtea 13y ago
    >My 50 year old plumber knows jack about Metaphysics, Quantum Field Theory or Abstract Expressionism despite - as in a Louis CK bit - his seeing a dead body "one time". Well, most of the stuff guys "under 40" think they know about "Metaphysics, Quantum Field Theory or Abstract Expressionism" are a half-understood mismash too (I'm not talking about someone with a PhD in Physics here). And, as some they will find out later in life, not only knowledge of those "serious academic topics" doesn't matter as much as they thought, but also most of them are inherently bullshit too.
    - mjburgess 13y ago
aaronem 13y ago
You confuse respect with reverence, and pseudo-intellectualism with lively intellect; I can't imagine why. Incidentally, your malaprop is showing.
mojowo11 13y ago
Most of the reverence for this guy (regardless of whether you find it pseudo-intellectual or not) can probably be explained by the fact that Paul Graham is a co-founder of Y Combinator, and you're on ycombinator.com.
mattmanser 13y ago
pg, a pseudo-intellectual? I'm frankly surprised you've been here for 2 years and never realised. You see the ycombinator in news.ycombinator.com? In this website? That's pg's company. Do you know what ycombinator is? That he started the seed funding movement? That he was blogging about hacking startups before people even really realised you could hack startups? Before lean startup existed? That he's written his own dialect of LISP? That he started and sold his own startup in the early days of the web? And that, now this is some serious respect, it was actually written in LISP? That's not cultish, it's earned respect and pg's got it in buckets around here. Crikey. Little drunk, but crikey, talk about having absolutely no fucking clue. The guy's a machine of intellectualism, most things he turns his mind to he de-constructs, encapsulates and then explains brilliantly. Yeah, occasionally he's wrong, especially when he tries to justify certain aspects of exploitative capitalism, but damn he's good. Very good. And that response was classic pg as grellas said.
- rsl7 13y ago
  pg started the seed funding movement? puh-leeeze.
  - mattmanser 13y ago
    I meant seed accelerator.
- seiji 13y ago
  That's not cultish I am disinclined to acquiesce to your assertion. Listing accomplishments is okay. Listing accomplishments paired with fawning and idolatry is cultish.
  - mattmanser 13y ago
    disinclined to acquiesce Oh dear. But anyway, given that I actually pointed out I disagree with him in some aspects, how is that fawning? The guy's got a history that reads better than any of us here could probably hope for and he writes some amazingly well thought out and well reasoned essays. I'm don't idolize him, I think he's more intelligent than me. Which I say about very, very few people. I think it's absurd to call him a pseudo-intellectual.
Jd 13y ago
pg is a nerd who got rich without being any less of a nerd. He also helps other nerds get rich. Any clue why that would be popular?
theorique 13y ago
What's with the almost cult-like relevance for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur? - Founded a successful web apps company back in the 1990s when that wasn't common, and sold it to Yahoo - Founded Y Combinator to advise and invest in startups - Smart investor with substantial success and track record (Dropbox, AirBnB, etc) In other words, he's earned a reputation for doing some very smart things, and documenting them in clear, easily understood language, over the past 20 years. I'm not being a mirer or a nuthugger here. I participate in HN because it benefits me and I learn useful things amidst the noise. (And of course pg started this site too.)
- coldtea 13y ago
  And was quite prominent in the Lisp community, back in the day too.
  - aerique 13y ago
    That might still be an understatement. He wrote one of the top books for (Common) Lisp: http://www.paulgraham.com/onlisp.html http://www.paulgraham.com/onlisp.html Peter Norvig on the book: http://www.amazon.com/review/RRFAH7G81ASUL/ref=cm_cr_dp_title?ie=UTF8&ASIN=0130305529&nodeID=283155&store=books http://www.amazon.com/review/RRFAH7G81ASUL/ref=cm_cr_dp_titl...
- mwilcox 13y ago
  Not to mention his academic qualifications: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(computer_programmer)#Education http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Graham_(computer_programme...
- robg 13y ago
  Indeed, if pg is a pseudo-intellectual, then the word "intellectual" has so little meaning as to be useless. That's not ball washing. That's a comparison to the journalists, academics, writers, editors, analysts, etc etc who aspire to that public identity.
- ericd 13y ago
  And was one of the first people to use probabilistic methods to fight spam, which is what finally made spam an almost non-issue.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
Ygg2 13y ago
> What's with the almost cult-like relevance for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur? People worship and idolize their heroes all the time.
dinkumthinkum 13y ago
Honestly, this is a troll comment. By making the comment you will assuredly elicit the response you expect, imply, but it is not necessarily for the reason you state. pg was misrepresented and held out as a misogynist. We think highly of pg, why should we not defend what is merely slanderous nonsense? I'm the first one to disagree with many ideas in our echo chamber ... That's healthy. But the idea that pg said anything wrong is ridiculous.
ajslater 13y ago
>What's with the almost cult-like reverence for this largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur? Who, pray tell, are the real intellectuals?
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
visakanv 13y ago
I have a problem with the term "pseudo-intellectual". What's an intellectual, and what's a psuedo-intellectual? Please define your terms.
- ryguytilidie 13y ago
  If you have some sort of actual experience in Philosophy and enter an opinion on a subject relating to Philosophy, that is an intellectual argument. If you are an entrepreneur with no training in Philosophy and enter an opinion on a subject relating to Philosophy that is a pseudo-intellectual argument. Pretty simple really. Note: I don't think that he actually is a pseudo-intellectual, just giving you the example you were asking for.
  - kbenson 13y ago
    Ignoring the fact that it was pointed out elsewhere in the comments that pg has a BA in Philosophy (apparently confirmed by wikipedia), this assumes that someone without training has nothing worthwhile to contribute[1]. While that may end up being true in the majority of cases, I don't think it's valid to apply the term to individuals just because they don't have credentials, in the absence of other evidence. I do like Merriam Webster's definition[2]. 1: I'm not trying to argue with you. You plainly qualified it as a clarification, not a position. I just think your definition falls short in some respects, so thought I would clarify your clarification. :) 2: http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/pseudo-intellectual http://www.learnersdictionary.com/definition/pseudo-intellec...
    - ryguytilidie 13y ago
      So you knew the answer, but you asked the question anyway? Okay...
      - kbenson 13y ago
        I think you are mistaken about something, since I didn't ask any questions.
benched 13y ago
largely pseudo-intellectual entrepreneur Seriously, wtf. What does this even mean when talking about a person, and not a particular essay? Do you honestly not think that Paul Graham embodies a life of the intellect?
Confusion 13y ago
It's interesting how people are attacking you for using 'pseudo-intellectual', while completely disregarding the 'cult-like reverence' bit. Your question is just as damning without the 'pseudo-intellectual' adjective, yet they are trying to change that to 'intellectual'. This is a nice demonstration of 'framing': you frame pg as not deserving cult-like reverence because of his 'pseudo-intellectuality' and people respond by explaining how he is a true intellectual. Except that the arguments they give for that assertion are wrong, because that is not the assertion for which they have arguments. Their arguments actually explain why pg is revered and they are now contorted to be arguments that seem to be meant to explain why is he is cult-like revered for his intellectuality. The result is that it seem like people are tacitly acknowledging the 'cult-like reverence' and are giving completely ridiculous arguments in support. The ridiculousness of those arguments is pointed out and we get into pointless discussions about what things mean, completely losing sight of the original point. The bottom line is: pg is revered and reasons for that reverence are given. There is nothing cult-like about the reverence and the pseudo-intellectual part of his writings (I would use another word to describe that quality of the writings, but that is beyond my current argument), are not the reason for the reverence.
- mjburgess 13y ago
  You're right. I shouldve emphasized the "pseudo" part had more to do with the gap between how people treat him and how he really is.
sytelus 13y ago
Go change how an entire industry works, help found more successful startups than you can count on your fingers, pile up few billions while you are also coding a prime destination on web for hackers - and then you too would get a cult-like reverence for your pseudo-intellect.
richardw 13y ago
He writes for hackers, not for Nature, his articles take a week, not a year. People like to read his perspective and he's got some street cred. Why does it bother you so much if he has a following? So do sportspeople, businesspeople, graffiti artists. That's ok. It takes very little from your life. Personally I'm glad he takes the time. If you can do better, go for it.

dylandrop 13y ago

Can we lay off the cheesy deification of PG? He was called a sexist, and he responded well. He is not a paragon of society, he is simply someone who is very good at tech and making money. And he is probably a good person too, but come on, this is just silly. On a second note I'm also curious as to what exactly you're referring to when you say he has the credibility that should make us know that he isn't sexist. I'm not saying he is sexist, I'm just saying that all of his credibility lies in making good business decisions, not gender relations.

reeses 13y ago
"On a second note I'm also curious as to what exactly you're referring to when you say he has the credibility that should make us know that he isn't sexist. I'm not saying he is sexist, I'm just saying that all of his credibility lies in making good business decisions, not gender relations." I agree. This willful blindness to bias and prejudice because smart people are not biased or prejudiced prevents us from examining our thoughts and behavior.

orionblastar 13y ago

Look you are getting credibility and trust confused with respect and other things. Personally I don't trust anyone, I've been burned too many times. Yeah that makes me paranoid, but it comes from too many bad professional relationships were I was backstabbed by the other person to further their career goals. I must state that this does not happen in every organization, and that there are a few people I would trust if they showed some good faith and helped me out with things. But since nobody I know wants to help me out, and once I reached the age of 40 I get old I am too old for this industry. But PG is worthy of my respect, he has paid his dues in this industry, he knows what he is talking about and has experience, he hasn't backstabbed anyone that I know of so he has credibility, yes he is one of the few that I would trust had he helped me out in some way. Look there is a lot of jealousy in the industry for experienced people. We get called nerds, geeks, dorks, etc by all of the people in other industries. They claim they know how to use a computer, and sure maybe use a Wordprocessor and write on a blog using Wordpress, but every once in a while one of them gets a bad case of jealousy that 'hackers' or 'IT workers' know more than they do, so they lash out and do a hatchet job on someone who got some attention in the media. This is basically politics, and how one person can backstab another. I've had my words taken out of context a lot as well. It is but just one way to backstab someone. It is not just the Internet trolls who do it but the news media and these people writing blogs that hate the startup community. In street terms, these people are 'haters' if I used that term correctly. My sister who got into discoranism calls such people as 'greyfaces' and here is the Urban Dictionary definition. http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=greyface http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=greyface You can use either the first or second definition, and it would define the person who did this to PG quite accurately.

Crito 13y ago
Do you give people who you respect the benefit of the doubt? By that, I mean that if they say something that could be interpreted charitably or uncharitably, do you tend to tentatively assume that they meant it the charitable way? I think that is what grellas means by "trust".
- orionblastar 13y ago

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

calibraxis 13y ago

Let's not praise Paul Graham just yet, based solely on his response. The Information's founder Jessica Lessin offered comments like: "We reviewed the transcript again and shared it with Paul. We stand behind our excerpting and editing for clarity. We continue to believe that the quote is in its proper context. Thanks for checking in." (http://valleywag.gawker.com/paul-graham-says-women-havent-been-hacking-for-the-pa-1490581236 http://valleywag.gawker.com/paul-graham-says-women-havent-be...) More importantly, it's not about some beloved leader besmirched by a drive-by interview. The focus is best on YC's track record — and what it'll do to fix it — not a quote/misquote.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

bambax 13y ago

As you observe yourself, PG's credibility didn't work in this case; I'm not sure it ever does. For example, how does the non-credibility of the press work? We all know from experience that the actual business of the press in general is to produce catchy headlines based on a forced interpretation of the "facts" (or based on no facts at all). And yet, we're always ready to trust an article and get all upset as if the press was doing its theoretical job of uncovering some hidden truth (last sentence of PG's post: "even now I'm still fooled occasionally.") Why is that? Why does the press still have any credibility left?