Reading 04: Nerds and Hackers (Paul Graham)

 I think that Paul Graham is an interesting figure after reading these essays, and to be honest, I agree and disagree with him wildly on many different subjects. One particularly major thing that I disagree with is The Conformist Test. I fall under the category of someone that would not be reluctant to share my views around my peers - and I think that is not because of conformity, but because of my relationship with my own beliefs. It has taken me a very long time to understand what I truly believe, and those beliefs come from many different areas and experiences of life that are important to me. I would love to talk to my peers about any of these beliefs, why I hold them, and what impact they could have on society. Some topics may be hard to express due to the nature of the problem (IE politics), but that doesn't mean that I should be reluctant to share those views in front of people.

I think that I think this way because I grew up a marginalized nerd, partially due to sexual orientation but also partially due to the fact that my high school had a graduating class of only 82. You either were friends with the people there, or you weren't. My friends were mostly all older, and after they graduated, I was pretty much alone at my high school with no real options to fall back on, because I was a nerd. Long gone were the days of crowding around the chemistry lab tables with our new Magic The Gathering decks, talking about the newest Dr. Who season. All of them left, leading me to be the only nerd left. I think I partially agree with Paul Graham here, in where he talks about the link between liking nerdy things, being smart, and unpopularity. I cannot relate to Paul Graham in some aspects here however, as I did not go to a public school. I also disagree partially with his 'thesis', as I do believe that most teenagers were unhappy monsters - I was one of them, and nearly everyone at my high school was one too. There were exceptions, but those exceptions were few and far between. 

I also think that Paul Graham's characterization of 'hackers' is interesting, as it feels more like a blend of all of the other 'hackers' terminology that we have seen thus far. He talks about the common media version of hackers, but explains that the unruliness of such hackers is one of the more core components. I think that this is interesting, as it really was not as core of a component of being a hacker before, it was just a common stream of thought that a lot of people who hacked tended to have. I understand that in the other texts, being 'against the man' was a common point of conversation, however the 'unruliness' really was not emphasized as much. It being labeled as a core tenant and identity of hacking makes sense, and definitely is what hacking is more based upon in the modern era.