非看不可，独立思考，高瞻远瞩的典范
一
This book is an attempt to explain to the world at large what goes on in the world of computers. So it’s not just for programmers. For example, Chapter 6 is about how to get rich. I believe this is a topic of general interest.
This book is to explain how things really are in our world, I decided it was worth the risk to use the words we use.The earlier chapters answer questions we have probably all thought about. What makes a startup succeed? Will technology create a gap between those who understand it and those who don’t? What doprogrammers do？And the next chapter is all about the things outside the computer stuffs.
And this book, probably the most intellectual book i have read in 2012,is an intellectually Western.Paul would want us to read it if a spirt of thinking and duty.
If you like ideas,this book ought to be fun：）
二
如果你是程序员或者从事互联网相关工作，这本书非读不可，可能会比我们一些outsider会有更多的价值和启发。
只是，《Hackers&Painters》不仅仅是给programmer读的，特别是第一章“ Why Nerds Are Unpopular”，第三章“What You Can’t Say”，和自己觉得最精彩的第六章“How to Make Wealth ”这几章都值得一读再读。
实话说，在读这本书的过程中，自己屡屡被Paul的思考和洞见所震撼。边读边在想，“怎么会有人这么厉害”“这他都能想得出”“太牛B了”，给人高山仰止的感觉。然后萌生出，“这书不是我能看得透的”的挫败感。
不过这并不妨碍自己对本书的崇拜。就好像当时读《How life imitates chess》（棋与人生）的感觉一样。
《How life imitates chess》是棋王加里·卡斯帕罗夫的自传。这本书写的不是一个人如何下棋的故事。而是一本人生指南。他告诉你如何完成人生棋局的完美对弈。
在武侠小说里面，渴望成为武林高手的人，都希望得到一本盖世神功的武林秘籍。因为这秘籍一旦得手，只要依葫芦画瓢，就可大功告成。
但是世事有怎会如此简单，也永远不会有这样或者那样的武林秘诀，
棋王的<How life imitates chess>和现在这本“硅谷创业教父”Paul Graham的<Hackers&painters>能教给我们的是一种严密思维的方式，是一种高瞻远瞩的决策习惯，是独立思考的力量，这些东西才是真正应对“未来不确定性”最有力的武器。
Paul认为，想要清晰思考，就必须远离人群。但是走得越远，你的处境就会越困难。
How can you see the wave, when you’re the water?
如果自己就是潮水的一部分，怎么能够潮流的方向呢？你只能永远保持质疑，每当觉得觉得这是理所当然的时候，问自己，why
好了，不说了，自己拿起书看吧，享受思维激荡的乐趣：）
=========================
Readingnote：
这本书其实就是随笔的集合，各篇文章没有什么相关性，这里主要是第一，三，六章的笔记
==================
为什么“书呆子”不受人喜欢，为什么有些人喜欢欺负“书呆子”，人们喜欢贬低人而抬高自己（特别是感觉有“威胁性”的），或者为了合群，他们需要一个共同的敌人：
Another reason kids persecute nerds is to make themselves feel better. When you tread water, you lift yourself up by pushing water down. Likewise, in any social hierarchy, people unsure of their own position will try to emphasize it by maltreating those they think rank below. I’ve read that this is why poor whites in the United States are the group most hostile to blacks.But I think the main reason other kids persecute nerds is that it’s part of the mechanism of popularity. Popularity is only partially about individual attractiveness. It’s much more about alliances. To become more popular, you need to be constantly doing things that bring you close to other popular people, and nothing brings people closer than a common enemy.
==============================
最受欢迎的学生是不会欺负“书呆子”的，因为他们没必要去“显得合群”，所以那些喜欢攻击“呆子”或者贬低人的，都是那些焦虑的“中间阶层”
没自信的人，才会去贬低人而去凸显自己的身份或者聪明啊！
If I remember correctly, the most popular kids don’t persecute nerds; they don’t need to stoop to such things. Most of the persecution comes from kids lower down, the nervous middle classes.
======================
真实世界的人群如此庞大，不管你有多少“小众”，但也总能找到一大班和你志同道合的人，而这班人聚在一起，力量也是巨大的。可惜在学校的时候没人会教会你，到了社会才明白到这回事。后来，特别是学术界，那些曾经的书呆子都很喜欢夸大自己的如何“笨拙”，而显得自己很聪明。
The other thing that’s different about the real world is that it’s
much larger. In a large enough pool, even the smallest minorities can achieve a critical mass if they clump together. Out in the real world, nerds collect in certain places and form their own soci- eties where intelligence is the most important thing. Sometimes the current even starts to flow in the other direction: sometimes, particularly in university math and science departments, nerds de- liberately exaggerate their awkwardness in order to seem smarter. John Nash so admired Norbert Wiener that he adopted his habit of touching the wall as he walked down a corridor
===================
为什么我们学生，青年会让那些“大人”看不起，因为我们“没用”。不像过去，以前的小朋友，14,15岁就要出去做学徒了，就算因为太小不能做一些专业的事，也能扫扫地，送送信，然后等他们成年之后，都已经掌握了基本的谋生技巧。对于大人来说是“有价值的”。
那时，小孩对大人很尊敬，因为他们看到大人是怎样工作的。大人也很重视小孩，因为小孩能帮他们分担压力。
Teenage kids used to have a more active role in society. In pre- industrial times, they were all apprentices of one sort or another, whether in shops or on farms or even on warships. They weren’t left to create their own societies. They were junior members of adult societies.
Teenagers seem to have respected adults more then, because the adults were the visible experts in the skills they were trying to learn. Now most kids have little idea what their parents do in their distant offices, and see no connection (indeed, there is precious little) between schoolwork and the work they’ll do as adults.
And if teenagers respected adults more, adults also had more use for teenagers. After a couple years’ training, an apprentice could be a real help. Even the newest apprentice could be made to carry messages or sweep the workshop.
Now adults have no immediate use for teenagers. They would be in the way in an office. So they drop them off at school on their way to work, much as they might drop the dog off at a kennel if they were going away for the weekend.
Teenagers now are useless, except as cheap labor in industries
like fast food, which evolved to exploit precisely this fact. In almost any other kind of work, they’d be a net loss. But they’re also too young to be left unsupervised. Someone has to watch over them, and the most efficient way to do this is to collect them together in one place. Then a few adults can watch all of them.
================
设身处地为他人着想。举例来说，几乎所有最伟大的绘画作品都是画人的，因为人类总是对自身感兴趣。
When I was a kid I was constantly being told to look at things from someone else’s point of view. What this always meant in practice was to do what someone else wanted, instead of what I wanted. This of course gave empathy a bad name, and I made a point of not cultivating it.
Boy, was I wrong. It turns out that looking at things from other people’s point of view is practically the secret of success.
Empathy doesn’t necessarily mean being self-sacrificing. Far from it. Understanding how someone else sees things doesn’t imply that you’ll act in his interest; in some situations—in war, for example— you want to do exactly the opposite
======================
最令人暴跳如雷的言论，就是被认为说出了真相的言论。
智力越高的人，越愿意是思考那些惊世骇俗的思想观点。
而做一个异端也是会有回报的，在任何有竞争的地方，只要你能看到别人看不到或不敢看的东西，你就会有很大的优势
Whatever the reason, there seems a clear correlation between intelligence and willingness to consider shocking ideas. This isn’t just because smart people actively work to find holes in conven- tional thinking. Conventions also have less hold over them to start with. You can see that in the way they dress.
It’s not only in the sciences that heresy pays off. In any compet- itive field, you can win big by seeing things that others daren’t.
================
训练自己去想那些不能想的事情，你获得的好处会超过所得到的想法本身。
Training yourself to think unthinkable thoughts has advan- tages beyond the thoughts themselves. It’s like stretching. When you stretch before running, you put your body into positions much more extreme than any it will assume during the run. If you can think things so outside the box that they’d make people’s hair stand on end, you’ll have no trouble with the small trips outside the box that people call innovative
======================
关于“守口如瓶”
自由思考比畅所欲言更重要。心里无所不想，但是不一定要说出来。
与笨蛋辩论，你也会变成笨蛋。
但是这样也会失去“讨论”的乐趣，所以找一些信得过得知己，一些不会因为你的“异端邪说”而气急败坏的朋友应该是最值得你认识的。
When you find something you can’t say, what do you do with it? My advice is, don’t say it. Or at least, pick your battles.
Argue with idiots, and you become an idiot.
The most important thing is to be able to think what you want, not to say what you want. And if you feel you have to say everything you think, it may inhibit you from thinking improper thoughts. I think it’s better to follow the opposite policy. Draw a sharp line between your thoughts and your speech. Inside your head, anything is allowed. Within my head I make a point of encouraging the most outrageous thoughts I can imagine. But, as in a secret society, nothing that happens within the building should be told to outsiders. The first rule of Fight Club is, you do not talk about Fight Club
The trouble with keeping your thoughts secret, though, is that you lose the advantages of discussion. Talking about an idea leads to more ideas. So the optimal plan, if you can manage it, is to have a few trusted friends you can speak openly to. This is not just a way to develop ideas; it’s also a good rule of thumb for choosing friends. The people you can say heretical things to without getting jumped on are also the most interesting to know.
====================
永远质疑的精神。
想要清晰思考，就必须远离人群。但是走得越远，你的处境就会越困难。
如果自己就是潮水的一部分，怎么能够潮流的方向呢？你只能永远保持质疑，问自己，什么话是我不能说的？
Perhaps the best policy is to make it plain that you don’t agree with whatever zealotry is current in your time, but not to be too specific about what you disagree with. Zealots will try to draw you out, but you don’t have to answer them. If they try to force you to treat a question on their terms by asking “are you with us or against us?” you can always just answer “neither.”
To see fashion in your own time, though, requires a conscious effort. Without time to give you distance, you have to create dis- tance yourself. Instead of being part of the mob, stand as far away from it as you can and watch what it’s doing. And pay especially close attention whenever an idea is being suppressed
Labels like that are probably the biggest external clue. If a
statement is false, that’s the worst thing you can say about it. You don’t need to say that it’s heretical. And if it isn’t false, it shouldn’t be suppressed. So when you see statements being attacked as x-ist or y-ic (substitute your current values of x and y), whether in 1630 or 2030, that’s a sure sign that something is wrong. When you hear such labels being used, ask why.
Especially if you hear yourself using them. It’s not just the mob you need to learn to watch from a distance. You need to be able to watch your own thoughts from a distance. That’s not a radical idea, by the way; it’s the main difference between children and adults. When a child gets angry because he’s tired, he doesn’t know what’s happening. An adult can distance himself enough from the situation to say “never mind, I’m just tired.” I don’t see why one couldn’t, by a similar process, learn to recognize and discount the effects of moral fashions.
You have to take that extra step if you want to think clearly. But it’s harder, because now you’re working against social cus- toms instead of with them. Everyone encourages you to grow up to the point where you can discount your own bad moods. Few encourage you to continue to the point where you can discount society’s bad moods.
How can you see the wave, when you’re the water? Always be questioning. That’s the only defence. What can’t you say? And why?
====================
致富的最好办法是，创业或者加入创业公司。
把创业想想成一个压缩过程，你的所有工作年份压缩成短短几年，你不再是低强度工作40年，而是超高强度工作四年。
承受较大的压力通常会为你带来额外的报酬。
If you wanted to get rich, how would you do it? I think your best bet would be to start or join a startup. That’s been a reliable way to get rich for hundreds of years
Economically, you can think of a startup as a way to compress your whole working life into a few years. Instead of working at a low intensity for forty years, you work as hard as you possibly can for four. This pays especially well in technology, where you earn a premium for working fast.
In a startup you compress all this stress into three or four years. You do tend to get a certain bulk discount if you buy the economy-size pain, but you can’t evade the fundamental conservation law. If starting a startup were easy, everyone would do it.
=====================
大饼理论是错的。（即富人占了90%的财富之类的）
金钱不是财富。
财富是可以创造的。
如果你当算创业，那么不管你是否意识到，你都是在招手推翻这种大饼理论。
The Pie Fallacy
A surprising number of people retain from childhood the idea that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world. There is, in any normal family, a fixed amount of money at any moment. But that’s not the same thing.
I can remember believing, as a child, that if a few rich people had all the money, it left less for everyone else. Many people seem to continue to believe something like this well into adulthood. This fallacy is usually there in the background when you hear someone talking about how x percent of the population have y percent of the wealth. If you plan to start a startup, then whether you realize it or not, you’re planning to disprove the Pie Fallacy.
What leads people astray here is the abstraction of money. Money is not wealth. It’s just something we use to move wealth around. So although there may be, in certain specific moments (like your family, this month) a fixed amount of money available to trade with other people for things you want, there is not a fixed amount of wealth in the world. You can make more wealth. Wealth has been getting created and destroyed (but on balance, created) for all of human history.
=====================
工作是什么？
大学毕业生不应该说：我需要一份工作。
你需要去做一些人们需要的东西，即使不加入公司，你也能做到。公司不过是一群人在一起工作。共同做出某种人们需要的东西。
Someone graduating from college thinks, and is told, that he
needs to get a job, as if the important thing were becoming a member of an institution. A more direct way to put it would be: you need to start doing something people want. You don’t need to join a company to do that. All a company is is a group of people working together to do something people want. It’s doing something people want that matters, not joining the group.6
For most people the best plan probably is to go to work for some existing company. But it is a good idea to understand what’s happening when you do this. A job means doing something people want, averaged together with everyone else in that company
==============
公司无法使每个员工贡献平均化。
除了销售员，和高级管理人员。因为他们的贡献是可以量化的。
如果每个人的工作都可以量化，那公司就牛B了。但是是不可能。
Companies are not set up to reward people who want to do this. You can’t go to your boss and say, I’d like to start working ten times as hard, so will you please pay me ten times as much? For one thing, the official fiction is that you are already working as hard as you can. But a more serious problem is that the company has no way of measuring the value of your work.
Salesmen are an exception. It’s easy to measure how much revenue they generate, and they’re usually paid a percentage of it. If a salesman wants to work harder, he can just start doing it, and he will automatically get paid proportionally more.
There is one other job besides sales where big companies can hire first-rate people: in the top management jobs. And for the same reason: their performance can be measured. The top man- agers are held responsible for the performance of the entire com- pany.
Because an ordinary employee’s performance can’t usually be measured, he is not expected to do more than put in a solid ef- fort. Whereas top management, like salespeople, have to actually come up with the numbers. The CEO of a company that tanks cannot plead that he put in a solid effort. If the company does badly, he’s done badly.
If you want to go faster, it’s a problem to have your work tangled together with a large number of other people’s. In a large group, your performance is not separately measurable—and the rest of the group slows you down.
===============
要想做的事牛B：
你要具备两点：可测量性和可放大性
To get rich you need to get yourself in a situation with two things, measurement and leverage. You need to be in a position where your performance can be measured, or there is no way to get paid more by doing more. And you have to have leverage, in the sense that the decisions you make have a big effect.
f you’re in a job that feels safe, you are not going to get rich, because if there is no danger there is almost certainly no leverage.
If you can’t measure the value of the work done by individual employees, you can get close. You can measure the value of the work done by small groups.
That’s the real point of startups. Ideally, you are getting to- gether with a group of other people who also want to work a lot harder, and get paida lot more, than they would ina big company. And because startups tend to get founded by self-selecting groups of ambitious people who already know one another (at least by reputation), the level of measurement is more precise than you get from smallness alone. A startup is not merely ten people, but ten people like you.
===================
创业公司就像游击队，喜欢不易生存的深山老林作为根据地，政府的正规军无法追到那种地方。
专攻难题。
如果我们都做不出，其他人就更加做不出了
At Viaweb one of our rules of thumb was run upstairs. Suppose you are a little, nimble guy being chased by a big, fat, bully. You open a door and find yourself in a staircase. Do you go up or down? I say up. The bully can probably run downstairs as fast as you can. Going upstairs his bulk will be more of a disadvantage. Running upstairs is hard for you but even harder for him.
What this meant in practice was that we deliberately sought hard problems. If there were two features we could add to our software, both equally valuable in proportion to their difficulty, we’d always take the harder one. Not just because it was more valuable, but because it was harder. We delighted in forcing big- ger, slower competitors to follow us over difficult ground. Like guerillas, startups prefer the difficult terrain of the mountains, where the troops of the central government can’t follow. I can remember times when we were just exhausted after wrestling all day with some horrible technical problem. And I’d be delighted, because something that was hard for us would be impossible for our competitors.
=============
在初有一定规模的时候把公司卖掉，不失为一个好方法。
创立一间公司和管理一间公司是不同的概念。
A startup is like a mosquito. A bear can absorb a hit and a crab is armored against one, but a mosquito is designed for one thing: to score. No energy is wasted on defense. The defense of mosquitos, as a species, is that there are a lot of them, but this is little consolation to the individual mosquito.
Startups, like mosquitos, tend to be an all-or-nothing proposi- tion. And you don’t generally know which of the two you’re going to get till the last minute.
The closest you can get is by selling your startup in the early stages, giving up upside (and risk) for a smaller but guaranteed pay- off
I think it’s a good idea to get bought, if you can. Running a busi- ness is different from growing one. It is just as well to let a big company take over once you reach cruising altitude. It’s also finan- cially wiser, because selling allows you to diversify
The hard part about getting bought is getting them to act. For most people, the most powerful motivator is not the hope of gain, but the fear of loss.
======================
虽然是在写《黑客与画家》的书评，但是我又想起了《棋与人生》，棋王在这本了不起的作品的后记中，他是这样说的：
生活就是准备。
“我们的未来不仅取决于过去，更取决于我们如何理解和利用它。我回顾自己的前半生，就像缓缓旋转着年幼时父母送给我的地球仪一样。我们所珍视的，我们所成就的，我们所失去的---过去的这一切构成了我们的人生地图，这张地图不仅显示了我们过去的轨迹，也指明了我们未来的方向。然而，它最了不起的地方在于：不像刻在石头上的地图那样无法改变，凭借领悟和奋斗，我们就可以改变人生的图景。 ”
2012.3.11
By Hammer
This book is an attempt to explain to the world at large what goes on in the world of computers. So it’s not just for programmers. For example, Chapter 6 is about how to get rich. I believe this is a topic of general interest.
This book is to explain how things really are in our world, I decided it was worth the risk to use the words we use.The earlier chapters answer questions we have probably all thought about. What makes a startup succeed? Will technology create a gap between those who understand it and those who don’t? What doprogrammers do？And the next chapter is all about the things outside the computer stuffs.
And this book, probably the most intellectual book i have read in 2012,is an intellectually Western.Paul would want us to read it if a spirt of thinking and duty.
If you like ideas,this book ought to be fun：）
二
如果你是程序员或者从事互联网相关工作，这本书非读不可，可能会比我们一些outsider会有更多的价值和启发。
只是，《Hackers&Painters》不仅仅是给programmer读的，特别是第一章“ Why Nerds Are Unpopular”，第三章“What You Can’t Say”，和自己觉得最精彩的第六章“How to Make Wealth ”这几章都值得一读再读。
实话说，在读这本书的过程中，自己屡屡被Paul的思考和洞见所震撼。边读边在想，“怎么会有人这么厉害”“这他都能想得出”“太牛B了”，给人高山仰止的感觉。然后萌生出，“这书不是我能看得透的”的挫败感。
不过这并不妨碍自己对本书的崇拜。就好像当时读《How life imitates chess》（棋与人生）的感觉一样。
《How life imitates chess》是棋王加里·卡斯帕罗夫的自传。这本书写的不是一个人如何下棋的故事。而是一本人生指南。他告诉你如何完成人生棋局的完美对弈。
在武侠小说里面，渴望成为武林高手的人，都希望得到一本盖世神功的武林秘籍。因为这秘籍一旦得手，只要依葫芦画瓢，就可大功告成。
但是世事有怎会如此简单，也永远不会有这样或者那样的武林秘诀，
棋王的<How life imitates chess>和现在这本“硅谷创业教父”Paul Graham的<Hackers&painters>能教给我们的是一种严密思维的方式，是一种高瞻远瞩的决策习惯，是独立思考的力量，这些东西才是真正应对“未来不确定性”最有力的武器。
Paul认为，想要清晰思考，就必须远离人群。但是走得越远，你的处境就会越困难。
How can you see the wave, when you’re the water?
如果自己就是潮水的一部分，怎么能够潮流的方向呢？你只能永远保持质疑，每当觉得觉得这是理所当然的时候，问自己，why
好了，不说了，自己拿起书看吧，享受思维激荡的乐趣：）
=========================
Readingnote：
这本书其实就是随笔的集合，各篇文章没有什么相关性，这里主要是第一，三，六章的笔记
==================
为什么“书呆子”不受人喜欢，为什么有些人喜欢欺负“书呆子”，人们喜欢贬低人而抬高自己（特别是感觉有“威胁性”的），或者为了合群，他们需要一个共同的敌人：
Another reason kids persecute nerds is to make themselves feel better. When you tread water, you lift yourself up by pushing water down. Likewise, in any social hierarchy, people unsure of their own position will try to emphasize it by maltreating those they think rank below. I’ve read that this is why poor whites in the United States are the group most hostile to blacks.But I think the main reason other kids persecute nerds is that it’s part of the mechanism of popularity. Popularity is only partially about individual attractiveness. It’s much more about alliances. To become more popular, you need to be constantly doing things that bring you close to other popular people, and nothing brings people closer than a common enemy.
==============================
最受欢迎的学生是不会欺负“书呆子”的，因为他们没必要去“显得合群”，所以那些喜欢攻击“呆子”或者贬低人的，都是那些焦虑的“中间阶层”
没自信的人，才会去贬低人而去凸显自己的身份或者聪明啊！
If I remember correctly, the most popular kids don’t persecute nerds; they don’t need to stoop to such things. Most of the persecution comes from kids lower down, the nervous middle classes.
======================
真实世界的人群如此庞大，不管你有多少“小众”，但也总能找到一大班和你志同道合的人，而这班人聚在一起，力量也是巨大的。可惜在学校的时候没人会教会你，到了社会才明白到这回事。后来，特别是学术界，那些曾经的书呆子都很喜欢夸大自己的如何“笨拙”，而显得自己很聪明。
The other thing that’s different about the real world is that it’s
much larger. In a large enough pool, even the smallest minorities can achieve a critical mass if they clump together. Out in the real world, nerds collect in certain places and form their own soci- eties where intelligence is the most important thing. Sometimes the current even starts to flow in the other direction: sometimes, particularly in university math and science departments, nerds de- liberately exaggerate their awkwardness in order to seem smarter. John Nash so admired Norbert Wiener that he adopted his habit of touching the wall as he walked down a corridor
===================
为什么我们学生，青年会让那些“大人”看不起，因为我们“没用”。不像过去，以前的小朋友，14,15岁就要出去做学徒了，就算因为太小不能做一些专业的事，也能扫扫地，送送信，然后等他们成年之后，都已经掌握了基本的谋生技巧。对于大人来说是“有价值的”。
那时，小孩对大人很尊敬，因为他们看到大人是怎样工作的。大人也很重视小孩，因为小孩能帮他们分担压力。
Teenage kids used to have a more active role in society. In pre- industrial times, they were all apprentices of one sort or another, whether in shops or on farms or even on warships. They weren’t left to create their own societies. They were junior members of adult societies.
Teenagers seem to have respected adults more then, because the adults were the visible experts in the skills they were trying to learn. Now most kids have little idea what their parents do in their distant offices, and see no connection (indeed, there is precious little) between schoolwork and the work they’ll do as adults.
And if teenagers respected adults more, adults also had more use for teenagers. After a couple years’ training, an apprentice could be a real help. Even the newest apprentice could be made to carry messages or sweep the workshop.
Now adults have no immediate use for teenagers. They would be in the way in an office. So they drop them off at school on their way to work, much as they might drop the dog off at a kennel if they were going away for the weekend.
Teenagers now are useless, except as cheap labor in industries
like fast food, which evolved to exploit precisely this fact. In almost any other kind of work, they’d be a net loss. But they’re also too young to be left unsupervised. Someone has to watch over them, and the most efficient way to do this is to collect them together in one place. Then a few adults can watch all of them.
================
设身处地为他人着想。举例来说，几乎所有最伟大的绘画作品都是画人的，因为人类总是对自身感兴趣。
When I was a kid I was constantly being told to look at things from someone else’s point of view. What this always meant in practice was to do what someone else wanted, instead of what I wanted. This of course gave empathy a bad name, and I made a point of not cultivating it.
Boy, was I wrong. It turns out that looking at things from other people’s point of view is practically the secret of success.
Empathy doesn’t necessarily mean being self-sacrificing. Far from it. Understanding how someone else sees things doesn’t imply that you’ll act in his interest; in some situations—in war, for example— you want to do exactly the opposite
======================
最令人暴跳如雷的言论，就是被认为说出了真相的言论。
智力越高的人，越愿意是思考那些惊世骇俗的思想观点。
而做一个异端也是会有回报的，在任何有竞争的地方，只要你能看到别人看不到或不敢看的东西，你就会有很大的优势
Whatever the reason, there seems a clear correlation between intelligence and willingness to consider shocking ideas. This isn’t just because smart people actively work to find holes in conven- tional thinking. Conventions also have less hold over them to start with. You can see that in the way they dress.
It’s not only in the sciences that heresy pays off. In any compet- itive field, you can win big by seeing things that others daren’t.
================
训练自己去想那些不能想的事情，你获得的好处会超过所得到的想法本身。
Training yourself to think unthinkable thoughts has advan- tages beyond the thoughts themselves. It’s like stretching. When you stretch before running, you put your body into positions much more extreme than any it will assume during the run. If you can think things so outside the box that they’d make people’s hair stand on end, you’ll have no trouble with the small trips outside the box that people call innovative
======================
关于“守口如瓶”
自由思考比畅所欲言更重要。心里无所不想，但是不一定要说出来。
与笨蛋辩论，你也会变成笨蛋。
但是这样也会失去“讨论”的乐趣，所以找一些信得过得知己，一些不会因为你的“异端邪说”而气急败坏的朋友应该是最值得你认识的。
When you find something you can’t say, what do you do with it? My advice is, don’t say it. Or at least, pick your battles.
Argue with idiots, and you become an idiot.
The most important thing is to be able to think what you want, not to say what you want. And if you feel you have to say everything you think, it may inhibit you from thinking improper thoughts. I think it’s better to follow the opposite policy. Draw a sharp line between your thoughts and your speech. Inside your head, anything is allowed. Within my head I make a point of encouraging the most outrageous thoughts I can imagine. But, as in a secret society, nothing that happens within the building should be told to outsiders. The first rule of Fight Club is, you do not talk about Fight Club
The trouble with keeping your thoughts secret, though, is that you lose the advantages of discussion. Talking about an idea leads to more ideas. So the optimal plan, if you can manage it, is to have a few trusted friends you can speak openly to. This is not just a way to develop ideas; it’s also a good rule of thumb for choosing friends. The people you can say heretical things to without getting jumped on are also the most interesting to know.
====================
永远质疑的精神。
想要清晰思考，就必须远离人群。但是走得越远，你的处境就会越困难。
如果自己就是潮水的一部分，怎么能够潮流的方向呢？你只能永远保持质疑，问自己，什么话是我不能说的？
Perhaps the best policy is to make it plain that you don’t agree with whatever zealotry is current in your time, but not to be too specific about what you disagree with. Zealots will try to draw you out, but you don’t have to answer them. If they try to force you to treat a question on their terms by asking “are you with us or against us?” you can always just answer “neither.”
To see fashion in your own time, though, requires a conscious effort. Without time to give you distance, you have to create dis- tance yourself. Instead of being part of the mob, stand as far away from it as you can and watch what it’s doing. And pay especially close attention whenever an idea is being suppressed
Labels like that are probably the biggest external clue. If a
statement is false, that’s the worst thing you can say about it. You don’t need to say that it’s heretical. And if it isn’t false, it shouldn’t be suppressed. So when you see statements being attacked as x-ist or y-ic (substitute your current values of x and y), whether in 1630 or 2030, that’s a sure sign that something is wrong. When you hear such labels being used, ask why.
Especially if you hear yourself using them. It’s not just the mob you need to learn to watch from a distance. You need to be able to watch your own thoughts from a distance. That’s not a radical idea, by the way; it’s the main difference between children and adults. When a child gets angry because he’s tired, he doesn’t know what’s happening. An adult can distance himself enough from the situation to say “never mind, I’m just tired.” I don’t see why one couldn’t, by a similar process, learn to recognize and discount the effects of moral fashions.
You have to take that extra step if you want to think clearly. But it’s harder, because now you’re working against social cus- toms instead of with them. Everyone encourages you to grow up to the point where you can discount your own bad moods. Few encourage you to continue to the point where you can discount society’s bad moods.
How can you see the wave, when you’re the water? Always be questioning. That’s the only defence. What can’t you say? And why?
====================
致富的最好办法是，创业或者加入创业公司。
把创业想想成一个压缩过程，你的所有工作年份压缩成短短几年，你不再是低强度工作40年，而是超高强度工作四年。
承受较大的压力通常会为你带来额外的报酬。
If you wanted to get rich, how would you do it? I think your best bet would be to start or join a startup. That’s been a reliable way to get rich for hundreds of years
Economically, you can think of a startup as a way to compress your whole working life into a few years. Instead of working at a low intensity for forty years, you work as hard as you possibly can for four. This pays especially well in technology, where you earn a premium for working fast.
In a startup you compress all this stress into three or four years. You do tend to get a certain bulk discount if you buy the economy-size pain, but you can’t evade the fundamental conservation law. If starting a startup were easy, everyone would do it.
=====================
大饼理论是错的。（即富人占了90%的财富之类的）
金钱不是财富。
财富是可以创造的。
如果你当算创业，那么不管你是否意识到，你都是在招手推翻这种大饼理论。
The Pie Fallacy
A surprising number of people retain from childhood the idea that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world. There is, in any normal family, a fixed amount of money at any moment. But that’s not the same thing.
I can remember believing, as a child, that if a few rich people had all the money, it left less for everyone else. Many people seem to continue to believe something like this well into adulthood. This fallacy is usually there in the background when you hear someone talking about how x percent of the population have y percent of the wealth. If you plan to start a startup, then whether you realize it or not, you’re planning to disprove the Pie Fallacy.
What leads people astray here is the abstraction of money. Money is not wealth. It’s just something we use to move wealth around. So although there may be, in certain specific moments (like your family, this month) a fixed amount of money available to trade with other people for things you want, there is not a fixed amount of wealth in the world. You can make more wealth. Wealth has been getting created and destroyed (but on balance, created) for all of human history.
=====================
工作是什么？
大学毕业生不应该说：我需要一份工作。
你需要去做一些人们需要的东西，即使不加入公司，你也能做到。公司不过是一群人在一起工作。共同做出某种人们需要的东西。
Someone graduating from college thinks, and is told, that he
needs to get a job, as if the important thing were becoming a member of an institution. A more direct way to put it would be: you need to start doing something people want. You don’t need to join a company to do that. All a company is is a group of people working together to do something people want. It’s doing something people want that matters, not joining the group.6
For most people the best plan probably is to go to work for some existing company. But it is a good idea to understand what’s happening when you do this. A job means doing something people want, averaged together with everyone else in that company
==============
公司无法使每个员工贡献平均化。
除了销售员，和高级管理人员。因为他们的贡献是可以量化的。
如果每个人的工作都可以量化，那公司就牛B了。但是是不可能。
Companies are not set up to reward people who want to do this. You can’t go to your boss and say, I’d like to start working ten times as hard, so will you please pay me ten times as much? For one thing, the official fiction is that you are already working as hard as you can. But a more serious problem is that the company has no way of measuring the value of your work.
Salesmen are an exception. It’s easy to measure how much revenue they generate, and they’re usually paid a percentage of it. If a salesman wants to work harder, he can just start doing it, and he will automatically get paid proportionally more.
There is one other job besides sales where big companies can hire first-rate people: in the top management jobs. And for the same reason: their performance can be measured. The top man- agers are held responsible for the performance of the entire com- pany.
Because an ordinary employee’s performance can’t usually be measured, he is not expected to do more than put in a solid ef- fort. Whereas top management, like salespeople, have to actually come up with the numbers. The CEO of a company that tanks cannot plead that he put in a solid effort. If the company does badly, he’s done badly.
If you want to go faster, it’s a problem to have your work tangled together with a large number of other people’s. In a large group, your performance is not separately measurable—and the rest of the group slows you down.
===============
要想做的事牛B：
你要具备两点：可测量性和可放大性
To get rich you need to get yourself in a situation with two things, measurement and leverage. You need to be in a position where your performance can be measured, or there is no way to get paid more by doing more. And you have to have leverage, in the sense that the decisions you make have a big effect.
f you’re in a job that feels safe, you are not going to get rich, because if there is no danger there is almost certainly no leverage.
If you can’t measure the value of the work done by individual employees, you can get close. You can measure the value of the work done by small groups.
That’s the real point of startups. Ideally, you are getting to- gether with a group of other people who also want to work a lot harder, and get paida lot more, than they would ina big company. And because startups tend to get founded by self-selecting groups of ambitious people who already know one another (at least by reputation), the level of measurement is more precise than you get from smallness alone. A startup is not merely ten people, but ten people like you.
===================
创业公司就像游击队，喜欢不易生存的深山老林作为根据地，政府的正规军无法追到那种地方。
专攻难题。
如果我们都做不出，其他人就更加做不出了
At Viaweb one of our rules of thumb was run upstairs. Suppose you are a little, nimble guy being chased by a big, fat, bully. You open a door and find yourself in a staircase. Do you go up or down? I say up. The bully can probably run downstairs as fast as you can. Going upstairs his bulk will be more of a disadvantage. Running upstairs is hard for you but even harder for him.
What this meant in practice was that we deliberately sought hard problems. If there were two features we could add to our software, both equally valuable in proportion to their difficulty, we’d always take the harder one. Not just because it was more valuable, but because it was harder. We delighted in forcing big- ger, slower competitors to follow us over difficult ground. Like guerillas, startups prefer the difficult terrain of the mountains, where the troops of the central government can’t follow. I can remember times when we were just exhausted after wrestling all day with some horrible technical problem. And I’d be delighted, because something that was hard for us would be impossible for our competitors.
=============
在初有一定规模的时候把公司卖掉，不失为一个好方法。
创立一间公司和管理一间公司是不同的概念。
A startup is like a mosquito. A bear can absorb a hit and a crab is armored against one, but a mosquito is designed for one thing: to score. No energy is wasted on defense. The defense of mosquitos, as a species, is that there are a lot of them, but this is little consolation to the individual mosquito.
Startups, like mosquitos, tend to be an all-or-nothing proposi- tion. And you don’t generally know which of the two you’re going to get till the last minute.
The closest you can get is by selling your startup in the early stages, giving up upside (and risk) for a smaller but guaranteed pay- off
I think it’s a good idea to get bought, if you can. Running a busi- ness is different from growing one. It is just as well to let a big company take over once you reach cruising altitude. It’s also finan- cially wiser, because selling allows you to diversify
The hard part about getting bought is getting them to act. For most people, the most powerful motivator is not the hope of gain, but the fear of loss.
======================
虽然是在写《黑客与画家》的书评，但是我又想起了《棋与人生》，棋王在这本了不起的作品的后记中，他是这样说的：
生活就是准备。
“我们的未来不仅取决于过去，更取决于我们如何理解和利用它。我回顾自己的前半生，就像缓缓旋转着年幼时父母送给我的地球仪一样。我们所珍视的，我们所成就的，我们所失去的---过去的这一切构成了我们的人生地图，这张地图不仅显示了我们过去的轨迹，也指明了我们未来的方向。然而，它最了不起的地方在于：不像刻在石头上的地图那样无法改变，凭借领悟和奋斗，我们就可以改变人生的图景。 ”
2012.3.11
By Hammer
有关键情节透露
- 作者: Paul Graham
- 出版: O'Reilly Media
- 定价: GBP 14.50
- 装帧: Paperback
- 页数: 272
- 时间: 2010-6-7