Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Another way of putting it:

It all comes down to details. An effective critic can point out why something sucks, what parts of it suck, under what conditions it may suck, what other alternatives might not suck, and how to improve it so it doesn't suck any more.

A hater only knows that it sucks. A cheerleader only knows that it rocks. In both cases, their opinion is completely binary: it either sucks or it rocks. There's no room for nuance or shades of grey in that assessment.

I suspect that passion is correlated but not causative here. When you're passionate about something, you tend to notice the details. That's the same skill that makes you an effective critic. But you can remain an effective critic even when you're no longer passionate about something. Take Jamie Zawinski, for example. His opinion on software matters to a lot of people, even though he probably cares a lot more about nightclubs these days. That's because he spent 10-15 years being exceptionally passionate about software, and in the process accumulated the skills he needs to make informed, nuanced judgments.



Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: