Friday Mar 21 2008 7:32 pm by Smokinn
First, you need to read this essay, Paul Graham's latest. Or at least as much of it as you can stomach before you stop.
Go ahead, I'll wait.
Back?
Ok.
See a problem with the article? I'll give you a hint.
Paul Graham is a human.
Paul Graham likes startups.
Therefore, humans like startups.
Given the above, humans not in startups are obviously sub-human.
That was pretty much the article, just not in so many words.
EDIT: Ok, maybe not sub-human, just unhappy.
EDIT2: Paul wrote an explanation of what he was really trying to say in the essay. I guess this was another issue of the missing body language and non-verbal queues causing people like me to get the wrong message.
He started off that way, but there are some things I think I agree with. Being part of a start up is definitely something I want to do at one point in my life. I don't feel like right now is the time for it.
I just don't like how he says what he likes is applicable to all humans, that he himself somehow defines the human condition.
I work for a startup now and may eventually start my own one day and you know I don't want to work for any huge company, but I'm not so conceited that I think humans are defined by my preferences.
Don't you know people who love the security blanket of big companies and look for a company to work for an entire career at? They like working at big companies and it hardly seems fair to imply that either they don't know what they want and are therefore living a much less happy and rewarding life as they could or that they aren't human, that they're somehow defective.
That's the message I got from his essay.