HN user
There's nothing inherently bad about lauding hackers. But the essay as published said, "Athletes are always making things; they can't help themselves". That makes no sense. What makes some sense is if someone started with text about hackers, and substituted the word "athletes".
The term "athlete" is not a stupid term. But substituting it for "hacker" sometimes produces absurd results.
WARNING: CONTAINS SPOILERS.
I don't understand why so far (6 comments) people are commenting seriously on this essay.
This essay looks like a somewhat mechanical prank to me, as if someone decided to:
1. Assemble generic hacker news style article about why hackers are good. For example, "Hackers are always making things, they can't help themselves". [RE-EDIT: This is an actual quote from the essay, except that the word "athletes" was used instead of "hackers".]
2. Make it stupid by substituting "athlete" for "hacker". Maybe they thought this would be an obvious absurdity because they think hackers are "nerds", and that "nerds" and "jocks" are obvious opposites?
3. Make it slightly less obvious by dressing it up with a little extra athlete-related stuff, like the cartoons about athletes.
I would also like to suggest that "Jason Freedman" is an obvious parody substitution for "Jason Fried." Also, "42floors" <--> "37 signals" [EDIT: My God, it turns out these are supposedly a real person and his real company. Coincidence, or convenient choice to surf on the influence of similarity?]
My take: do you spend too much time reading "Hacker News", so hurriedly that your credulity muscles get too much exercise?