Quite frankly I'm getting sick of these "rules" for what constitutes the best way to do something. Isn't that the manifesto of "hacking"...that there is no one way to do something? We all see countless articles on here "How to do this, How to do that". The fact is, all of these rules are just frameworks and how you implement them is up to you as a person. So my note for hackers is: your hero was passionate about what he wanted, that's a good co-founder
The recent story about PG and Dropbox said it best:
"This is why one of our rules is that we’ll break any of our rules."
In fact, one of the inspirations of the use of the word "hacker" was that they broke the rules.
This could just be "engineer news", but it is "hacker news" because PG is celebrating those who took unconventional approaches.
That's what a hack is.
The problem is, when a site becomes mainstream popular it brings in a lot of people outside of its core demographic. In this case, there are a lot of people who are not engineers who think that engineering is cool, and want to think that they are elite.
And when someone is a poser, they know they don't measure up, so they try and define who the "legit" ones are.
You see this posturing among teenagers a lot. (maybe a lot of Hacker News visitors are just out of their teens?)
Quite frankly I'm getting sick of these "rules" for what constitutes the best way to do something. Isn't that the manifesto of "hacking"...that there is no one way to do something? We all see countless articles on here "How to do this, How to do that". The fact is, all of these rules are just frameworks and how you implement them is up to you as a person. So my note for hackers is: your hero was passionate about what he wanted, that's a good co-founder
The recent story about PG and Dropbox said it best: "This is why one of our rules is that we’ll break any of our rules."
[1] - http://www.forbes.com/sites/bruceupbin/2011/10/18/paul-graha...