Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 98 posts

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#41

Post by venkynarayanan »

sama wrote: post #23
Mz wrote: post #3

Unfortunately, there is a bit too much unstated assumption of "just be lucky (fortunate) as hell in multiple metrics from an incredibly young age." This seriously undermines the value of this advice for at least 99% of people.

Luck is a massive, massive factor in many ways, but I generally think you should make decisions as if it weren't a factor.

By luck do mean like, riding a wave (unknowingly) just when it has started which turns out to be a pretty huge wave thus enabling you to build something massive.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#42

Post by pg_is_a_butt »

flyosity wrote: post #15

I'm sure this will get downvoted into oblivion, but why should I or other engineers/entrepreneurs look at Sam Altman as a massive startup success story when his lone startup Loopt never really achieved product-market fit, and ended up in a firesale? Across 5 funding rounds, Crunchbase lists Loopt as having raised $39 million and then was acquired (acqui-hired?) for $43 million. He didn't create any multiples of value…

uh... that is the point. how do you build the future? you let someone else do it, and shylock a percentage.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#43

Post by lifeisstillgood »

It strikes me you need to slice him thin and use a lot of glue and even then I doubt you could build much more than a big yurt.

Maybe I need to read the article more carefully.

(A little more seriously the idea of finding the Venn overlap point between Good At, Love Doing, Adds Value is nice. Does not help me find my next big idea but at least is a filter)

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#44

Post by lifeisstillgood »

flyosity wrote: post #15

I'm sure this will get downvoted into oblivion, but why should I or other engineers/entrepreneurs look at Sam Altman as a massive startup success story when his lone startup Loopt never really achieved product-market fit, and ended up in a firesale? Across 5 funding rounds, Crunchbase lists Loopt as having raised $39 million and then was acquired (acqui-hired?) for $43 million. He didn't create any multiples of value…

To be fair, Warren Buffet has never been much of a traditional entrepreneur but I would certainly listen if he gave me advice on my business.

Perhaps some people are players, some are coaches.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#45

Post by mattmanser »

lpolovets wrote: post #32
flyosity wrote: post #15

I'm sure this will get downvoted into oblivion, but why should I or other engineers/entrepreneurs look at Sam Altman as a massive startup success story when his lone startup Loopt never really achieved product-market fit, and ended up in a firesale? Across 5 funding rounds, Crunchbase lists Loopt as having raised $39 million and then was acquired (acqui-hired?) for $43 million. He didn't create any multiples of value…

To add another data point in support of Sam's comment, I think one can build a good understanding of entrepreneurship and how to increase the chances of success without having been a hugely successful founder. I joined VC four years ago because I wanted to learn more about early-stage startups before starting my own, and I ended up falling in love with the job. I've learned a ton about factors of success and failure…

I watch football. By watching football I have built a good understanding of football management and how to increase the chances of success without having been a hugely successful football manager.

Maybe that's 50% of success of being a football manager. I can learn more than other football managers because I can watch lots of football games on Sky Sports.

That's why many top premiership teams hire their managers by finding the people who watch the most football games on TV.

EDIT: I'm sure there's plenty here who have been in more startups than me, but in the 4 or so I've been in, I've heard conversations between founders and investors plenty of times.

Often little of what comes out of the founders mouth is based in reality. Sometimes they're not seeing reality as it really is, sometimes they're painting a rosier picture, sometimes they're outright lying, sometimes they're tired and not thinking straight, sometimes they've got obsessed by something utterly irrelevant. Sometimes they're not actually listening to the staff, or not even asking the right questions.

As a VC or researcher or whatever, you're not actually playing the game. You're not on the team, you're not on the field, you're not even on the side-lines. You're seeing a different game than's being played.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#47

Post by CptJamesCook »

dwaxe wrote: post #40
CptJamesCook wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paul Graham started Y Combinator, which is a company. Paul Graham was a borderline founder of Reddit, as well.

By YC startup standards again, Reddit isn't a very successful company. The amount of early investment that went into it has certainly paid off, but monetization is a seriously hard problem for them.

Reddit's last round valued them at $500 million, and it is something like the 25th most visited site on the Internet.

That's a successful company by any standard.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#48

Post by joaorico »

Mz wrote: post #16
YuriNiyazov wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would love to read these studies, do you have some references?

https://www.psychologytoday.com/articles/201005/make-your-ow... http://www.bing.com/search?q=luck+studies&go=Submit&qs=n&for... http://www.forbes.com/sites/michakaufman/2015/01/30/embracin... http://www.codusoperandi.com/posts/increasing-your-luck-surf...

In addition to those, mostly as an example on how to start a actionable framework on luck, there's James Austin's 4 definitions of luck, see e.g. pmarca's old blog entry about it: http://pmarchive.com/luck_and_the_entrepreneur.html

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#49

Post by Alupis »

CptJamesCook wrote: post #47
dwaxe wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By YC startup standards again, Reddit isn't a very successful company. The amount of early investment that went into it has certainly paid off, but monetization is a seriously hard problem for them.

Reddit's last round valued them at $500 million, and it is something like the 25th most visited site on the Internet. That's a successful company by any standard.

> Reddit's last round valued them at $500 million

> That's a successful company by any standard.

Simply being "valued" at some dollar amount doesn't actually mean success. Revenue and positive net profit mean success...

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#50

Post by westoncb »

I especially liked the point about not seeing criticism or lack of attention as necessarily being red flags.

It's sort of counter-intuitive that this would be the case because after something fairly radically new becomes popular there's so much positive said about it.

It's an easy leap to assume that praise was always present, and that lack of it in your case is a signal that what you're working on won't succeed—but it seems like in actuality, when you're doing something novel enough people aren't going to 'get it' immediately by definition.

It's also easy to assume that those you speak to about your work will approach it with the optimism and energy with which you regard it, and without a little optimism and sustained attention it's easy to miss the potential or even comprehend the significance at all of some new idea.

Even having acknowledge this concept in the past, I still needed the reminder in the video to see I was potentially making the mistake again in my own project. It's a good point to remind yourself of periodically.

Post reply on HN