What do Painters Believe?
How did Michelangelo view authority? Did Vincent Van Gogh think that paint prices were too high for the common man? An even better question that Paul Graham poses: does it matter?
In contrast to Steven Levy's description of what constitutes a "true hacker", Graham is much less concerned with ideology. I think that Levy correctly identified many common characteristics of the hacking community, but I don't agree that they are necessary to be a hacker. Instead of classifying hackers based on their social status, anarchist tendencies, or mistrust of authority, Graham is focused on a much more abstract question: how does a hacker create? His description of hackers as akin to artists really resonated with me. Artists are ultimately defined by what they create in their free time, not ideologies they share.
As an example of the differences between these viewpoints, consider both author's views of the open source movement. Both identify the fact that hackers are drawn to crowdsourced volunteer work. Levy attributes this to the fact that hackers are obsessed with freedom of information. While many open source enthusiasts certainly are, I believe an equal number find it to be the most convenient way to create cool stuff. Graham posits that open source projects allow hackers to pursue what they are passionate about.
Architects vs Engineers vs Industrial Designers
A hacker is someone who treats their computer like a digital canvas. They have a vision of something and will not rest until their ideas have become manifest. In their source of inspiration, they are like architects. They must weave together a design from pure imagination and study of the works of old. This idea is useless, however, without an understanding of how it can be implemented. This is where the idea of software engineering comes from: a hacker must pull tools from a nearly infinite pool of digital resources and wrangle a solution. I dearly hope that the engineers that created my car, computer, and dorm would not describe their work as "wrangling." There is standardization and regularity involved with large-scale software production, but the work quickly loses its joy (and therefore its hacker status) once the process is swamped with red tape. Bureaucracy and due process (the staples of any respected engineering firm) are the death of a passion project.
Graham emphasizes an interesting aspect of computer science: the importance of empathy. He says:
"Like painting, most software is intended for a human audience. And so hackers, like painters, must have empathy to do really great work."
This quote reminded me of family members who work in industrial design and their nonstop talk of user experience and mindset. It's not hard to design a usable handle for a vacuum (attach a grip to the rod, done). Creating one that feels like a summer breeze to hold, however, requires empathy.
This designer loved ergonomics
On a similar vein, a great hacker thinks about how their users (and collaborators!) approach the product and codebase. This element of human interaction is totally missed by Levy, but Graham understands how artists intentionally draw the viewers' eyes and produce certain emotions.