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

71–80 of 98 posts

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#71

Post by rhizome »

npezolano wrote: post #31
sama wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I turned out to be a better investor than an entrepreneur (though somewhat to my surprise running YC is more about running a company than being an investor). I think I've learned a lot from working closely with entrepreneurs that run massively successful companies that's worth sharing. If you disagree, no one is making you watch this. You're free to hit the back button.

I find you learn the most from mistakes, either your own or from others.

There's a huge perverse incentive lurking in there.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#72

Post by dota_fanatic »

sama wrote: post #20
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…

I turned out to be a better investor than an entrepreneur (though somewhat to my surprise running YC is more about running a company than being an investor). I think I've learned a lot from working closely with entrepreneurs that run massively successful companies that's worth sharing. If you disagree, no one is making you watch this. You're free to hit the back button.

What's the purpose of your third line?

Obviously they didn't even click the link at all, but they had a legitimate question to ask the community in hopes of learning more about why the content is good. Your first two lines directly answer their questions, but the third one just seems, well, immature?

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#73

Post by rhizome »

mbesto wrote: post #63
CptJamesCook wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It might be "successful" (however you define that), but $8.3M in Revenue in 2014 (and an estimated $10M in 2015) on $50M in investment (not including Conde Naste's investment) in a 10 year period for a company valued at $500M and the 25th most visited site, seems like it's under-performing.

Underperforming relative to what standard?

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#74

Post by djs070 »

thesmallestcat wrote: post #59
sama wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I turned out to be a better investor than an entrepreneur (though somewhat to my surprise running YC is more about running a company than being an investor). I think I've learned a lot from working closely with entrepreneurs that run massively successful companies that's worth sharing. If you disagree, no one is making you watch this. You're free to hit the back button.

> If you disagree, no one is making you watch this. You're free to hit the back button. Why would somebody want to only consume media they agree with?

"Disagree" here is not about disagreeing with the content of the linked media, but whether you consider sama adequately credentialed or experienced to speak on the topic.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#75

Post by askafriend »

sama wrote: post #20
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…

I turned out to be a better investor than an entrepreneur (though somewhat to my surprise running YC is more about running a company than being an investor). I think I've learned a lot from working closely with entrepreneurs that run massively successful companies that's worth sharing. If you disagree, no one is making you watch this. You're free to hit the back button.

The parent comment asked a very valid question and I believe your third line was entirely un-necessary. I think you took it a little too personally and ironically if anyone else would have made such a comment, it would be flagged or downvoted into oblivion.

Look at it this way: if you're a musician and you're looking up to people for inspiration or advice to make great, interesting music - do you look to Kanye West or do you look to someone who failed to achieve success as a musician but then went on to become a record company executive? You look to Kanye West.

(to continue the analogy) So when a group of musicians are suddenly looking to the record company exec, it raises an interesting question: why?

It's not meant to be an attack on your character or your achievements...it's just an interesting question. Or at least, that's the way I interpreted it.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#76

Post by nashashmi »

rhizome wrote: post #73
mbesto wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It might be "successful" (however you define that), but $8.3M in Revenue in 2014 (and an estimated $10M in 2015) on $50M in investment (not including Conde Naste's investment) in a 10 year period for a company valued at $500M and the 25th most visited site, seems like it's under-performing.

Underperforming relative to what standard?

ROI: the standard of YC

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#77

Post by dota_fanatic »

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…

In the 5 vs 5 multiplayer game Dota 2, a given team's composition in the game is roughly broken down into two categories (pretty big over-simplification but let's run with it), carry and support. Carries are meant to "carry" their team on their back through perfect execution in their actions, leveraging the raw potential of the character they're controlling in that particular match. Being a professional carry player demands a very high level of mechanical skill and moment-to-moment tactical awareness.

Support players on the other hand, are relied upon to support the carries by getting supportive items, maintaining control over the map (fog of war is in effect), being in the right places at the right times so as to provide their carry with space to work, and generally staying at a higher level of awareness in order to make more of the big picture calls. Most teams' leader will play a support character.

I suspect something similar may be at work here, in that he is very good at choosing and supporting "carries". There are probably very many people in the world who are very perceptive, empathetic, and can achieve a high level of understanding, making them well-suited for leadership positions, but without luck in addition to giving it their best effort, are never put in a position to shine. Just because someone will never be a top-tier carry, doesn't mean they can't ever be a top-tier support, but our society tends to demand the former before you're trusted to do the latter.

Or not, just thinking out loud here. :)

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#78

Post by DrNuke »

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…

At the very least he summarises for us the YC data and puts forward (for free) the hints, the best practices, the recurrent patterns that characterise a good lot of the most successful startups in the world. He is a privileged but educated observer from within who can also relate with his own experience as a non-stellar performer as a startupper, if you want. A facilitator and an aggregator, isn't he?

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#79

Post by dlo »

dota_fanatic wrote: post #72
sama wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I turned out to be a better investor than an entrepreneur (though somewhat to my surprise running YC is more about running a company than being an investor). I think I've learned a lot from working closely with entrepreneurs that run massively successful companies that's worth sharing. If you disagree, no one is making you watch this. You're free to hit the back button.

What's the purpose of your third line? Obviously they didn't even click the link at all, but they had a legitimate question to ask the community in hopes of learning more about why the content is good. Your first two lines directly answer their questions, but the third one just seems, well, immature?

It's very natural to feel a bit defensive in response to criticism of this nature, which is actually an ad hominem. I don't know that many people would have done better. I think we have to remember that even larger-than-life characters like sama are also humans who feel emotions.

Re: How to Build the Future with Sam Altman

#80

Post by icantdrive55 »

I think everyone should watch this video, it gets better near the end.

I think we need one of theses videos for the really poor kids. The kids who barely finished college due to finances though.

He states his three factors to success are, 'focus, personal conviction, and self belief'.

(Poor kids need to network. Poor kids need to make friends with rich kids. Poor kids can't fail, and take a vacation to unwind. Poor kids, and by poor kids, I mean generational poor. No wealthy grandparents, etc. My biggest mistake was finding upper, middle class kids very shallow. I just couldn't be around them growing up, and even in college. I would cringe when they talked about their problems. I should have held my nose, and try to win their company. I have no reason to lie. They will introduce you to people that have money.)

He said work hard early on.

(Yes, but don't blow a gasket. I had a nervous breakdown in my late twenties. Before that breakdown, I was doing what two people did. I literally felt like nothing couldn't be accomplished. I felt like Superman. Everyone is different, and you will statistically be fine. Just watch it.)

He talks a lot about failing, and why it's not a bad thing.

(That's great, but kids from a poor family only seem to have one big failure in them. It usually involves financing from credit cards. I guess if you know the right financiers, networked, or have family money failing/taking risk is not financial suicide, or living in a box somewhere. Poor kids have the real possibility of ending up homeless if they fail. There just a different mindset when you come from nothing.)

"Successful people impact the world" I believe he said, 'Make the world a better place.'

(That might be true for a handful, but let's get real; it's about making a lot of money. It's about the paper.

I don't like it, but let's not romanize it--it's about making money. The financially successful don't like to admit it.

And if you don't make money in life--there are more important things than narcisstically making a lot of money. Being a good, moral person goes a long way. Can attract the right girlfriend/boyfriend. It's not a crime to think like Jesus did. It might talk you a long way?)

I think the best advice he gave was sticking with what you truly believe in. Yes--there's Twitter, and other examples, but I believe it's good advice. Go against the crowd caught my attention.

If YC is still funding founders after 10-14 failures; I'm very impressed with the organization.

Post reply on HN