Hacker News Reader

It's not just the "idea" that matters, but the understanding of how discrete data can be usefully collected, analyzed, and disseminated. Call me skeptical, but I don't think there are many marketers who really understand the admittedly pedantic logistics in this...I don't mean that they need to actually code this, but to understand that there is such a way to parse amorphous tasks and information such that something truly useful can be done.

I think you underestimate marketers. Some of those guys & gals are practically statisticians. Have you ever picked up a "marketing research" textbook and skimmed through it? Serious marketers know a LOT about how to "collect, analyze and disseminate" data.

Exactly. Here in The Netherlands, marketing historically has been a part of the faculty of economics. It involves a lot more statistics and model data than peope think.

I don't disagree here. But I don't think we're talking about the same thing. There are statisticians who are great at analysis...when the data is well formatted and granular. These same statisticians are less attune to how you collect and disseminate that data in different ways (a different "way" could be: how do I automate spam Craigslist subsections at relative intervals related to the frequency of postings in each particular subsections, and, of course, make this spam not look like spam?)

In the science and medicine field, there are obviously many brilliant, technical minds. Yet not all of them can properly code, which limits the domain of their work when it comes to efficiency and scope.

These same statisticians are less attune to how you collect and disseminate that data in different ways (a different "way" could be: how do I automate spam Craigslist subsections at relative intervals related to the frequency of postings in each particular subsections, and, of course, make this spam not look like spam?)

Fair point.

Point taken. I agree that there are a whole bunch of marketers who couldn't have come up with this idea because they don't have a basic knowledge of how these things work. Maybe I'm just fortunate enough to know a couple of them who actually do...

You come from a limited perspective...you know both coding and marketing and some of the fundamentals (particularly of the former) are so grounded that you can't possibly imagine a layman NOT knowing them. But trust me, many of them don't :)

I'd file that under "domain knowledge". Not only marketers need that though. If I am a coder and develop software that is used in fishing (and thus aquire knowledge about this domain), what does that make me? A maritime hacker?

Well, to use your same line of reasoning...Not all coders are necessarily "hackers", right? Hacking connotes a certain ability to work from outside a system, to improvise, and to "break things" for good or bad, which is why various groups of non-programmers are considered "hackers", at least by HN's upvotes.

Aren't these qualities needed by everyone? So why even have the term "hacker"? Why doesn't Lifehacker just call itself the "Life" blog?

So to answer your question, I don't know when are where we should draw the line when assigning titles. I don't think there are any obvious rules, and in the case of growth hackers, I think there is a specific combination of skills and insight that isn't adequately covered by just marketers or by just coders.

Yes. And it's not just about _not_ having ideas. Marketers have a billion ideas. Without any technical chops, though, they will drive your devs and designers into the ground with never-ending requests for integrations, trials, landing pages, bug fixes, and more.

A self-sufficient marketer is worth multiples not just in his/her own productivity, but in the gains you get from not driving the rest of your company bonkers.