Hackers and Painters

Paul Graham’s essay Hackers and Painters argues that hacking and painting are fundamentally similar creative disciplines.

The Core Insight

Both hackers and painters are “makers” focused on producing quality work rather than conducting research. Hacking is about design and creation, not engineering implementation.

Computer Science is Mislabeled

The term “computer science” lumps together incompatible groups: mathematicians, theoretical researchers, and hackers. Graham contends that “there’s no such thing” as computer science as traditionally defined.

Different Learning Paths

Hackers learn by doing original (though initially poor) work from the start, while scientists begin by reproducing existing work. This parallels how painters develop through practice and gradual refinement.

Design Over Specifications

Software should evolve through iterative refinement, like paintings. Flexible languages that enable rapid experimentation beat rigid specifications upfront. Programs should be “written for people to read.”

The Day Job Model

Since interesting software often doesn’t generate revenue, hackers need day jobs funding passion projects—mirroring how painters, writers, and musicians traditionally worked.

Empathy is Essential

Understanding user perspectives separates good hackers from great ones. Software must intuitively communicate its function.

My Takeaway

If you’re a builder, think of yourself as a maker, not an engineer. The craft matters as much as the technical skills.

How do you see the connection between creating and coding? I’d love to hear at persdre@gmail.com.