Hacker News Reader

Comment by jug6ernaut | Hacker News Reader

"I was explaining the distinction between a CS major and a hacker..."

"What I was talking about here is the idea that to do something well you have to be interested in it for its own sake, not just because you had to pick something as a major.So this is the message to take away:

    If you want to be really good at programming, you have to love it for itself. "

Labeling "CS major"'s as non hackers, good to know as someone with a CS degree.

While I 100% agree with your final above statement, I find it concerning that you would label everyone with a "CS major" as having motivations outside of a "hacker". I fail to see how they are mutually exclusive. I hope this was just a unfortunate choice of words.

View on HN

Most CS graduates I know did the bare minimum to earn their major credits and that's it, avoiding any challenging courses like the plague. They'd rather study some unrelated intro-level elective than computation theory. No actual interest in the field, no passion, no imagination. You're damn right they're not hackers. They're here for the gold rush and nothing more, they won't be the ones advancing this industry. They're the copy-paste from Stack Overflow types, they're the ones that get hired because their uncle works at the company, and they're the ones leaving knots behind them for others to sort out.

I know tons of CS majors who are terrible hackers. It's a non-necessary, insufficient condition. However, the best hackers often have a CS background. This is reality, and it is in line with what pg said. There is a distinction, ie, when I hear "CS major" I do not think "hacker", and when I hear "hacker" I do not think "CS major".

To think that pg of all people fails to see the value in a CS degree is pretty hilarious though.

You can major in CS without being a hacker, and you can be a hacker without majoring in CS.

Many, many hackers enter CS programs precisely because they are hackers and want to learn more about computers. Others take a different path.

Some people in CS aren't into it because they love it, but because their parents want them to get a "useful" degree, or because they heard that they can get a good job. All reasonable motivations, but different from doing something due to intrinsic motivation.

He doesn't say they are mutually exclusive, and it is a stretch to interpret it that way.

I think it's meant to be "I was explaining the distinction between a _mere_ CS major and a hacker".

Wasn't Mark Zuckerberg a CS major, and Graham praises him.

"the audience for an interview will include people who for various reasons want to misinterpret what you say, so you have to be careful not to leave them any room to."

What I quoted was not from the "interview"

Technically, you are correct. But you're missing the underlying comment that anyone can find fault with what you say if they use sufficient semantic boxing rather than granting a bit of slack.

What's amazing is how many people continue to do this, even though they have many times felt the aggravation of others doing it to their public posts.

I didn't read it as him saying the two were mutually exclusive... I thought the distinction was between 'just a [CS major]' as opposed to 'hacker' (who may or may not have a CS degree) - perhaps I just interpreted it the way I wanted to - but giving him the benefit of the doubt, I think he was just saying he wants founders that are intrinsically motivated (by having a desire to build stuff) rather than extrinsically (by a degree program)

Agreed, thats why I said I agreed with his statement "If you want to be really good at programming, you have to love it for itself."

I understand what hes trying to say, I just find it really odd that he would go about it by labeling a group of people as if they were intrinsically different.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com