Comment by argumentum | Hacker News Reader

Comment by argumentum | Hacker News Reader

It seems this discussion is going all the way back to high school and childhood. In that case, let's keep in mind that many (most?) of the kids who spent all their time "hacking" did so because they were often excluded from more social activities. Remember, there was essentially no social reward for "hacking" (unlike getting good grades, being a great athlete, able to tell jokes, speak in public, dance, sing, play an instrument and most other skills kids might develop).

Sure, today hacking is "cool" .. because money, fame and power are cool and many hackers have achieved that. But until very very recently (last couple years), the only reasons a kid would start hacking were curiosity and having little else to do because they couldn't (or didn't want to) fit in.

With that in mind, this article disturbs me in a way I can't easily explain. Particularly when she describes feeling like an imposter "in the face of the desirable hacker stereotype" and even claims the nerdy clothes that hackers wear are in and of themselves exclusionary simply because one might choose to be more fashionable.

This is no different from her stereotypical "hacker" complaining about having to wear different attire to fit in at a school dance (or should he/she later choose to go into banking, law or any profession other than programming at a startup).

I went to a top high school, where academic excellence (grades, SATs, AP tests, what college you got into, etc) was definitely cool and admired. Even then, if you saw a kid hacking in the hallway (or painting or otherwise working on things completely of their own choosing) you knew that he/she was likely at the bottom of the social totem pole.

These very people are who pg was speaking to in many of his early essays like http://paulgraham.com/nerds.html

The fact of the matter is that a disproportionate number of the best hackers come from that population. Those who were the "cool kids" in high school may want in now, but they'll have to earn their place at the table. If that means working ungodly hours, having to change the way they speak or dress to "fit in" .. when in Rome ..

(please do not misinterpret anything I wrote as condoning sexism, which is despicable in any setting)

My point about acceptance isn't about social acceptance, but acceptance based on merit and potential. When I was a young woman, I was discouraged not because hacking felt socially alienating, but because authority figures went out of their way to discourage me, despite my enthusiasm, aptitude, and desire for more.

I don't care that I don't dress like the "hacker" stereotype--if I really did, I'd have stopped wearing dresses already. What I find frustrating there is that other people judge "hacker" merit upon the stereotype, such as in http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/dress.html and https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1639740. In my life, this clothing stereotype has caused a bit of confusion: while not everyone is surprised a girl in heels can speak with technical merit, many have been. The clothing issue is hardly the end all and be all of the "hacker" stereotype--a stereotype which, like many other stereotypes, has some basis in reality but doesn't paint the full picture of the people who play around with difficult problems in clever ways.

I can't speak to your personal experiences, but clearly you didn't really struggle to gain acceptance on merit, despite the discouragement you encountered .. your enthusiasm and ability overcame that.

From what I understand, once these people heard you speak or worked with you, they treated you basically as one of them. That some were initially "surprised" with a female hacker wearing heels likely has less to do with stereotyping than sheer probability.

But what you seem to be asking is that they change their identity so that "outsiders" would feel more comfortable. That seems like a lot to ask, of anyone, for any reason.

I'm totally ok with this point of view when it comes to large tech companies. As a company like Facebook grows, it has to mature and accommodate a more diverse workforce, the majority of which would not self-identify as "hackers".

Startups, and the recent hullaballoo over pg's interview, are a slightly different beast. Founding a startup is somewhere in between a marriage and a business partnership. You can't tell someone who to marry or who to be friends with .. and consequently what to look for in a co-founder. You also can't force users to like products or services they simply don't want.

And when it comes to high school, there are a (lot)^2 worse problems than fashionable girls temporarily feeling slightly unwelcome at the computer club. Such as, for example, the psychopathic bullying that is part and parcel of high school life and that many "stereotypical hackers" had to endure.

If her point is no different to complaining about fitting in at a school dance, which I think is true, then surely the better response here is to recognise the pattern - it's bad when people feel they cannot belong in an environment that should be welcoming.

The discussions should be "bad things are bad, let's make things better".

I'd summarise your comment as very different: "That bad thing that you didn't like? It reminds me of a bad thing I didn't like. But I'm doing OK now, so I find it disturbing that you even mention your bad thing. Why should I want to help stop it, just because it's bad? Why would I want to get rid of the irrational, selfish barriers that protect my position?"

I think he makes an interesting point, though: hacker culture is to a large degree the culture of modern social exclusion. There is a sort of horrible irony to more well-adjusted people feeling excluded from it.

I know personally, when I was a teenager, "hacking" was definitely an escape, not so much from social isolation, but definitely from Problems You Don't Want. I can understand why people might be offended by the authors stance.

Though I agree with your sentiment, I would point out as a side note that a rational "selfish" person would certainly not want to get rid of barriers that protect their position :)

I do think the point I was trying to make needs making .. there are a lot of smart kids currently trapped in bad high school situations. Their plight deserves attention as well. Actually, I think these problems are far more related than it may seem at first glance. The correct answer to pg's question "how to get 13 year old girls interested in hacking" likely kills two birds with one stone.

I had a huge interest in game programming as a child. My older brothers and their friends were making text based RPGS. I however was a pretty good athlete and didn't have a hard time making friends like they did. I went from being a star junior high athlete to convincing my parents I wanted to be homeschooled so I could play on my computer all day.

I had a natural advantage in athletics so that some of my peers could not compete not matter how hard they tried. I think this is what helps me accept that there are hackers out there that will blow me away no matter how much of an effort I put into this.

This isn't very related to your comment, but, to me, "hacker" is synonymous to "maker". I'd call someone who builds a weird Rube Goldberg machine out of wood or a complicated metal gear system a hacker.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com