TE
TechEcho
Home24h TopNewestBestAskShowJobs
GitHubTwitter
Home

TechEcho

A tech news platform built with Next.js, providing global tech news and discussions.

GitHubTwitter

Home

HomeNewestBestAskShowJobs

Resources

HackerNews APIOriginal HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 TechEcho. All rights reserved.

Paul Graham & Sexism: Just One More Distraction From Real Work

53 pointsby ntippmannover 11 years ago

12 comments

ChrisNorstromover 11 years ago
Paul, you really need to stop being honest in public. The world doesn&#x27;t want honesty, it wants lies. It wants to feel good. Wake people up from their politically correct Utopian dream and they will attack you viciously. Just go with the flow and speak freely only to a close group of friends.<p>As I recall last time PG was honest about founders with heavy accents not doing well due to communication problems he attacked as well. American culture (founded on freedom of expression) has turned into a culture of witch hunts and public shaming. Leading more people to simply stop talking about important and many times controversial topics. From freedom of expression to fear of expression, who&#x27;s the witch hunt&#x27;s next victim?
评论 #6981291 未加载
评论 #6981275 未加载
评论 #6981298 未加载
willthepersonover 11 years ago
Is it really wrong to say that women could be better or worse (in general) at one thing or another? Is it sexist to even point out that men and women are different?<p>I think my wife is pretty awesome and capable of things I would not be able to do. Am I sexist for talking about it?<p>I think in the source PG even says that women are good (maybe better) than men at business focused startups. Or will the world not be balanced until just as many women are making hot or not for XYZ in the off hours
评论 #6981381 未加载
评论 #6981691 未加载
评论 #6982026 未加载
评论 #6981332 未加载
评论 #6982255 未加载
tptacekover 11 years ago
What we seem to be seeing now is a wave of commentary from people who are familiar only with what other people have said about the Graham interview at The Information, but who have not themselves read that interview carefully.
评论 #6981201 未加载
unclesaammover 11 years ago
&gt; While I fully get the the “hell hath no fury like a woman scorned” thing, I just have to say there’s really not much here to be pissed about.<p>The &quot;&#x27;hell hath no fury like a woman scored&#x27; thing&quot;? That&#x27;s an offensive thing to say in this context.<p>From PG&#x27;s interview:<p>&gt;Does YC discriminate against female founders?<p>&gt;I&#x27;m almost certain that we don&#x27;t discriminate against female founders because I would know from looking at the ones we missed. [...]<p>That&#x27;s not evidence, because YC boosts the success rate of those who get in.<p>That said, I agree with the idea that hacker culture is not something a CS major can impart, and that it helps to have an early start.
评论 #6981238 未加载
评论 #6981242 未加载
was_hellbannedover 11 years ago
If technology startups were founded more on business principles and less on hot air, tech hand-waving, and &quot;the Facebook of <i>X</i>&quot;, then this probably wouldn&#x27;t be so much of an issue.<p>Speaking as someone who got a home computer at eight, back when it was still <i>extremely</i> uncommon, and who never stopped programming, I actually think we vastly overvalue this whole &quot;you have to have been hacking since age 13&quot; angle. There are so many other elements that go into <i>actually delivering solid product</i> that I just don&#x27;t think we can point to that as the issue to focus on.<p>This is a symptom of a problem, not a qualification of proficiency.
评论 #6982023 未加载
zw123456over 11 years ago
I recently saw an interview between Eric Schmidt and Sheryl Sandberg on BookTV (www.booktv.org) and Sandberg made basically the same point but I think in a little bit more elegant way. She mentioned that she put her teenage daughter in computer camp and there were only 2 other girls in the camp, both of whom were Sandberg&#x27;s nieces and she also put them in there. The take away for her was that most parents do not encourage girls to go to computer camp. So there is a self fulfilling prophecy so to speak going on. I think both PG and SS are saying pretty much the same thing, but SS is the better person to say it in my view, not that PG shouldn&#x27;t comment, it&#x27;s just that him saying distracts from the key point, it is socialization that needs to change. And they are both correct, to be really good in tech, you need to start them young !
larrysover 11 years ago
I would be remiss if I didn&#x27;t reinforce a point that I make frequently that after (as Fred Wilson calls it) this &quot;shitstorm&quot; passes more normals will be aware of Paul Graham and YC do than before. And perhaps that will have an effect on the general conversation as far as women in tech or taking up computing (at age 13 or whatever) and actually do something useful.<p>Never let a good crisis go to waste as the saying goes.
holychizover 11 years ago
I normally don&#x27;t bother to comment on these manufactured outrages but I have to make an exception here. Look, PG clearly were referring in the interview to startup _founders_. The magazine twisted his words to make it sounds like he saying that women can&#x27;t be _coder_, meaning women can never learn to code well enough to get a job, which he never said. If that&#x27;s indeed what he say then everyone, you and I can decide to be outrage about it. But that&#x27;s not what he said. We should really be outraged at the magazine for this hit piece.
vezzy-fnordover 11 years ago
Finally, a relatively rational response.<p>On another note, I just realized that Medium.com is absolutely <i>inundated</i> with blog entries about pg&#x27;s statements. Wow.
lkbmover 11 years ago
pg says founders start programming when they&#x27;re thirteen, and concludes that we have a ten year lag time.<p>The author says founders can be much older than 23, so given that we have a ten year lag time, we can start with people will over 13.<p>pg: x=13 y=23 Therefore z=y-x=10.<p>Author: No, y=40 Therefore x=y-10=30.<p>There&#x27;s a pretty clear flaw in the author&#x27;s reasoning here. Why say x=10 when you&#x27;ve just rejected the value from which that ten was calculated?
评论 #6981397 未加载
robomartinover 11 years ago
The problem of getting anyone, young or adult, interested in a subject --any subject-- isn&#x27;t one with a simple solution. Technical subjects have the added difficulty that they require you to use your brain in non-trivial ways.<p>Given equal exposure to the subject matter, I fail to see how a male or female subject would react differently to the idea of learning that subject. This, of course, assuming that both the male and female subjects got to that moment in time with a similar educational and perhaps even cultural frame of reference.<p>If a mother only ever bought a little girl frilly pink and shiny things, well, it is probably unlikely that as a teenage girl or an adult woman she would even remotely show interest in learning more technical subjects. She will probably be a dancer and go into the arts or some other less &quot;brainy&quot; occupation. That&#x27;s not to say that there aren&#x27;t exceptions to this, but they are probably few and far between.<p>The same is true of boys. If they are brought-up in front of a playstation, shooting at things, playing sports, and well outside of more academically focused areas he will probably grow up to be a jock and then move on to careers that do well when you use half your brain. Hell, he might even go into sales!<p>Things are vastly different if you feed your kids a constant diet of what they should be learning in order to operate at a different level when they are older. My teenage son finished MIT&#x27;s CS 6.00.1x course just a few weeks ago. That did not happen magically. That was a lot of work. For me and for him! And that also required a lot of work to get to the point where he could even be shoved into that end of the pool.<p>My little girl is too young to think about formal learning of these kinds of subject, but this year she got introduced to Lego robotics and is starting to like it. Yet, the situation is exactly the same: It requires a ton of time and dedication on my part --as the designated nerd at home-- to keep her exposed to such subjects and make it fun. I have to get silly while teaching something useful. I have to figure out ways to make robotics fun, silly, exciting and something she wants to do. We don&#x27;t buy lots of silly frilly things for her. That said, I have to tell you, it is hard to fight both genetics and exposure to such things through her peers.<p>I guess my message is that parents needs to be very engaged and active in bringing up a child into the sciences and technology. It will not happen by osmosis. And, I really don&#x27;t think gender makes a huge difference. It might change the approach, but I don&#x27;t think it is the primary determinant of success or failure.<p>One way I&#x27;ve explained this in the past to friends who marvel at what my kids are doing is that this is like a Formula 1 car drafting a car in front of them. You need to drive well and use a lot of effort to get close enough to be within the zone where drafting happens. Up until that point you are using a lot more energy to chase the car in front of you. Once you get into the drafting zone you need less power to maintain the same speed. Yet, you still need that foot solidly planted on the accelerator.<p>With kids you have to push, push, push. I have navigated through really frustrating moments when I&#x27;ve gotten angry because I couldn&#x27;t understand why he (my oldest son) didn&#x27;t just grab that book I bought for him and launched himself into software development nirvana. Of course, I always reflected upon these things and never externalized them --not much of a motivator to yell and scream at your kid about learning something-- and realized that (a) he is still young and (b) we are not in the &quot;draft zone&quot; yet. It&#x27;ll take a lot more effort --and this is different from kid to kid-- to get him into the &quot;draft zone&quot;. Once we reach that zone it will require a lot less energy on my part and, if interested, he will ultimately need virtually no support from me.<p>This is where I look at some of the things being said about STEM education and can&#x27;t help but think we are just throwing money into a big bonfire. You can&#x27;t force people into learning anything. A lot of my kid&#x27;s friends are, well, jocks or exhibit no interest in anything at all. They are navigating through school with no guidance or encouragement in any direction whatsoever. You can&#x27;t just throw money at that and expect things to change. For most kids it requires far more work than can be done during the time they are at school. Yes, of course, there are a few kids in every sample group that need almost zero work. These kids get hooked on a subject like programming and just go, go , go. Most kids are not like that. Just like most successful businesses did not get launched with a long coding session over a weekend while eating popcorn.<p>Going back to my little girl, she is not seriously exposed to Lego robotics. In fact, our living room table is an official FLL table with the official field mat and everything. Yes, we are serious about this. I&#x27;d rather have a learning environment in my living room than a fancy dinning room table.<p>As far as why there aren&#x27;t more women in tech today. I don&#x27;t have the answer for that. I only know that when I was a teenager girls mostly did different stuff. Not because they were being forced away from tech, they simply showed no interest in what we were doing. My guess is that it all came from home. So, as our culture changes so will that aspect of things.<p>Evolution?
michaelochurchover 11 years ago
Paul Graham is probably not sexist, and if he&#x27;s ageist, it&#x27;s a product of his sampling bias. Most qualified 40+ founders are not going to be that interested in the 6%-for-$15k type of deal that YC offers. Those terms are great for someone out of college; not as much for a seasoned 40+ entrepreneur. There are plenty of very qualified 50-year-old entrepreneurs out there, but I doubt they&#x27;re applying to YC. I could be wrong; that&#x27;s just my best guess.<p>I&#x27;m not PG&#x27;s biggest fan, although I admire his Lisp chops. Still, this attack on him is ridiculous. The interview shows him as a decent guy admitting he can&#x27;t solve a difficult and complicated problem. Really, my feeling is, &quot;Nothing to see here, move along&quot;.<p>The truth is that even if Paul Graham <i>were</i> sexist, that wouldn&#x27;t be such a big deal if the startup industry were healthy, because the biases of one influential individual shouldn&#x27;t matter.<p>Rather, the VC-funded world is seriously and systemically ill-- and the rarity of female founders is a symptom of that sickness-- and PG is just being made (completely unreasonably, IMO) a lightning rod, even though he&#x27;s clearly one of the more reasonable (and probably one of the less sexist&#x2F;racist&#x2F;classist) investors out there.
评论 #6981262 未加载
评论 #6981243 未加载
评论 #6981347 未加载
评论 #6981280 未加载