14 ms·

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 wh

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.
      - mjburgess 13y ago
        Political power is one form of power; political action are one kind of action. The point I made encompassed them. For example "the ability to be heard" increases with wealth: having your opinion be prominent in a democratic society is politically powerful and the more money you have the more you are able to finance outlets for your views. One's ability to make money - to have one's skills suit the market; or to be lucky - has nothing to do with the value of your opinions or how frequently/prominently they should be offered to the rest of us. pg doesn't even begin to engage in anything like this critique of inequality. I dont really think he knows anything about why serious academic researchers and writers have seen inequality as a serious problem for democractic societies. Because he hasnt spent the time to find out.
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.

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.
    - mjburgess 13y ago
      Political power is one form of power; political action are one kind of action. The point I made encompassed them. For example "the ability to be heard" increases with wealth: having your opinion be prominent in a democratic society is politically powerful and the more money you have the more you are able to finance outlets for your views. One's ability to make money - to have one's skills suit the market; or to be lucky - has nothing to do with the value of your opinions or how frequently/prominently they should be offered to the rest of us. pg doesn't even begin to engage in anything like this critique of inequality. I dont really think he knows anything about why serious academic researchers and writers have seen inequality as a serious problem for democractic societies. Because he hasnt spent the time to find out.

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.