Thank you so much, 37signals guys.

I've always found pg's essays to be motivational and inspring, but there are two things that always turn me off; 1.) I don't live in San Fransisco, and probably never will, and 2.) I have a family. I often feel dismissed by PG and his disciples. DHH's stuff gives me hope that there's still a chance for "fogeys" (cripes, I'm only 33!) like me.

I have a feeling that, if I ever applied to YCombinator, my application would end up in the wastebasket the moment they caught a whiff of the fact that I have a wife and kids. Is that fair?

I stay up late into the night hacking after the kids go to bed, and I'm in the office hours before other people are there so I can do some extra hacking. Am I not motivated enough? Can I not be passionate? Perhaps DHH is onto something. Perhaps balancing the challenges of work and family five you a healthy dosage of time management and prioritization skills.

There are some interesting comments on DHH's site - several presumably young, single kids are crabby and crying "discrimination!" (e.g., "Wow, that’s actually offensive. And illegal in BC, Canada and I hope other enlightened jurisdictions.", or the more eloquent "I’m single and you can kiss my ..."). I wonder if these people have ever noticed that the discrimination often goes the other way, against the thirty-something parent crowd, too.

Even if people with kids were more productive per hour, that's not enough in a real startup. The empirical evidence is pretty clear on that. I can't think of a successful startup whose founders didn't, in addition to being smart and determined etc, also work long hours.

After a contractor decided on a radical life change and moved to a different country, leaving us without anyone with his skill set, my old manager used to joke that he should only hire people who have a mortgage, because they'll never leave on their own.

Funny as a joke, but a bit chilling when it's given as real advice.

I'm just going to point out that this sets a troubling precedent. If one firm thinks it's legitimate to discriminate in favor of mothers with children, that suggests that being a parent is an acceptable basis on which to discriminate. It opens the door to people thinking about whether somebody is a mother in making hiring decisions. That's troubling on a lot of levels, and in some states illegal.

EDIT: apparently the source has been revised to make it clear that the point is just to look evenly at parents and non-parents; that's OK, but I'll leave the comment above in reference to the earlier version.

I'm not complaining but is it 37signals week?

In the startups I've worked for, the best systems administrators were guys with 5-10 year old kids.

Experience actually counts for more in systems administration, so being older isn't a disadvantage. Surviving the infant-toddler years hones one's skills at managing interrupt-driven tasks and strange working hours.

Not to dredge up the past, but this refreshingly contrasts with Zuckerberg's encouragement at Startup School 2007: 'If you want to found a successful company, you should only hire young people with technical expertise'. http://www.texasstartupblog.com/2007/03/27/facebook-class-ac...

I assumed based on the title he meant "hire people from your family." Was totally expecting an essay about the McAskill's at SmugMug.

I wonder if this would have been better accepted if the title was:

"Why it doesn't make sense to discriminate against family people"

I'll admit, DHH coming into Hacker News is a breath of fresh air, even if a few of the 20-somethings here (including myself) can sniff out the psuedo-defeatist , "statistically its not possible" scent it is tinged with. I think, on the whole of things, pg isn't out to attract the type of people that want to start the types of business DHH is talking about.

I think pg is set out to do the same thing VC's do (invest in outlandish, maybe crazy ideas), albeit with a focus on extremely good hackers and with a fraction of the budget.

What DHH seems to be implying is that you should focus on building something that you can get paid for, right away, and throw away the big dreams. Which is pretty much the opposite of pg.

This is music to my ear as a father of three, 40 yo hacker.

I've been a programmer since I was 12 years old, and have over 30 years experience with technology companies - and yes, startups too .. I helped get a few major 90's-era dotcoms up and running and many of them are still at it today.

My experience is this: either you waste a lot of time futzing around with computers, or you make them do the work they need to do and get on with your life. It has nothing to do with how old or young you are, or how many kids you have. I am a very happy Father now - in fact, this is the greatest startup, with the most rewards, I've ever been involved in - and I'm still applying the same fundamental policy to myself as a programmer: get things done, don't futz around with computers, make them actually do the work they're supposed to do.

It doesn't matter what "kind" of person you are, it matters only what kind of things you make. I know 50-year old grandfathers who can kick royal Assembler ass and still leave early at the end of the day, and I know 18 year old kids who put the keyboard down after 8 hours and go do something else instead, as well.

IMHO, this over-generalization about 'types of people' is a real curse. I would say, don't do it. There are no 'types' of people in the computer world, no matter how the ycombinator cultists want to pitch it to the world: there are people who get things done, and people who don't.

Get things done. Get your code written, working, tested, and in the hands of people who will actually use it. If you can't do this, then you will fail. If you can, then rock on .. may your kids, now and in the future, always appreciate this aspect of you as a person.

Those 37signals people are very, very arrogant. I don't like it. I disagree on every post they have just by reading the title.