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

YC Annual Letter 2017

blog.samaltman.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 165 posts

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#131

Post by cicloid »

yellowbeard wrote: post #130
nostrademons wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, there's this weird effect where basically every major company has a gigantic fundamental hypocrisy in their mission statement: Google's is "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", and yet - if you leak anything about them as an employee, you are insta-fired. If you try to figure out any sense of organization about their product portfolio, good luck. If you try to scrape an…

I saw Zuckerberg walking in Palo Alto with wife, child and dog and no security visible just over a year ago. If he has 24/7 security, either they're very discreet or it started recently.

Probably a very discreet security detail. Not all of them need to be man or have the same haircut.

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#133

Post by nostrademons »

yellowbeard wrote: post #130
nostrademons wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, there's this weird effect where basically every major company has a gigantic fundamental hypocrisy in their mission statement: Google's is "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", and yet - if you leak anything about them as an employee, you are insta-fired. If you try to figure out any sense of organization about their product portfolio, good luck. If you try to scrape an…

I saw Zuckerberg walking in Palo Alto with wife, child and dog and no security visible just over a year ago. If he has 24/7 security, either they're very discreet or it started recently.

http://fortune.com/2016/04/28/protect-mark-zuckerberg/

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/mark-zuckerberg/121590...

I would bet on them being discreet. Good security is very good at making people unaware that security is present. I recall showing my relatives around the Googleplex when I worked there, having my brother-in-law comment on the seeming lack of security for such a high-value target, and then telling him "No, they're there - if you try to walk off with a laptop or take pictures of something you're not supposed to, they'll come running."

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#134

Post by nilved »

purple-again wrote: post #63
ForrestN wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's funny you say this—the first thing I did, even before reading the article, was search for "Thiel." It's going to be hard for me to take this sort of thing seriously, this telegraphing of benevolence which is so central to YC's branding, until they address the fact that one of their "partners" is such an obviously destructive force within society. They don't even have to do anything but say goodbye, and they won'…

While I disagree with many of Trumps beliefs and by proxy probably many of Thiels as well the fact that they refused to further the division of our country by excommunicating him for his beliefs is a huge pro in my book. The founder of Rails saying he would fire any of his employees that supported Trump was sickening and that kind of attitude will never allow us to move from bloodshed and war to one people.

This isn't the political climate you're used to. We are at the point where you can replace "Trump" with "literal nazis" and it's not ironic. Yes, it is to right to fire Trump supporters. Not only is it right, it is your moral imperative.

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#135

Post by fpig »

twelvechairs wrote: post #103
nostrademons wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Usually the product comes before the mission. Google's product was a search engine with better results than existed, but their mission was "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful". That mission statement was a key part in them getting key hires. Uber's mission is "Transportation as reliable as running water." Facebook's mission is "Make the world more open and transparent."…

If these were their real missions most of these companies they would be doing things very differently. Facebook transparent? Not a chance. Uber reliable? Not with surge pricing etc

I agree about Facebook, but surge pricing is exactly what makes Uber reliable.

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#136

Post by pitchups »

nostrademons wrote: post #86
optimusclimb wrote: post #62

> 4) Does this company have a clear and important mission? > Without this, I usually get bored. More importantly, companies that don’t have this usually have a hard time recruiting enough great people to work with them, and thus struggle to become very large. I find this one interesting. When Google started, there were many incumbent search engines. Their mission was to provide better results than what existed, i.e.…

Usually the product comes before the mission. Google's product was a search engine with better results than existed, but their mission was "to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful". That mission statement was a key part in them getting key hires. Uber's mission is "Transportation as reliable as running water." Facebook's mission is "Make the world more open and transparent."…

- Facebook's mission is "Make the world more open and transparent."

That was not their original founding mission. It was

"Thefacebook is an online directory that connects people through social networks at colleges [Harvard only][2004]"

In 2006 that mission was changed to include other universities and colleges.

Which is a long way from their current stated mission. In other words, mission statements evolve - and the founding mission is seldom the final mission for many companies.

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#137

Post by wtbob »

nostrademons wrote: post #110
twelvechairs wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If these were their real missions most of these companies they would be doing things very differently. Facebook transparent? Not a chance. Uber reliable? Not with surge pricing etc

So, there's this weird effect where basically every major company has a gigantic fundamental hypocrisy in their mission statement: Google's is "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", and yet - if you leak anything about them as an employee, you are insta-fired. If you try to figure out any sense of organization about their product portfolio, good luck. If you try to scrape an…

> Palantir's is "Palantir Technologies is a mission-driven company, and a core component of that mission is protecting our fundamental rights to privacy and civil liberties", and they sell to the CIA so they can spy on you.

The CIA doesn't spy on Americans.

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#138

Post by d0m »

optimusclimb wrote: post #62

> 4) Does this company have a clear and important mission? > Without this, I usually get bored. More importantly, companies that don’t have this usually have a hard time recruiting enough great people to work with them, and thus struggle to become very large. I find this one interesting. When Google started, there were many incumbent search engines. Their mission was to provide better results than what existed, i.e.…

Keep in mind that google's mission evolved over the years.. but at the beginning, they still had a clear mission of making it easy to search the web (compared to the portals that forced you to their bullshit content).

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#139

Post by schoen »

nostrademons wrote: post #110
twelvechairs wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If these were their real missions most of these companies they would be doing things very differently. Facebook transparent? Not a chance. Uber reliable? Not with surge pricing etc

So, there's this weird effect where basically every major company has a gigantic fundamental hypocrisy in their mission statement: Google's is "organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful", and yet - if you leak anything about them as an employee, you are insta-fired. If you try to figure out any sense of organization about their product portfolio, good luck. If you try to scrape an…

Is there a standard term for the tension that arises from people depending on the existence of the things that they get paid to mitigate? I've heard people mention the potential conflict of interest where anyone who gets paid to do something would lose their livelihood if that thing stopped being necessary, so in a sense we all have reasons not to want to solve things too well or too completely.

That's not exactly what you're talking about in each case, but it could be relevant.

Re: YC Annual Letter 2017

#140

Post by sebleon »

optimusclimb wrote: post #62

> 4) Does this company have a clear and important mission? > Without this, I usually get bored. More importantly, companies that don’t have this usually have a hard time recruiting enough great people to work with them, and thus struggle to become very large. I find this one interesting. When Google started, there were many incumbent search engines. Their mission was to provide better results than what existed, i.e.…

Ha, classic straw man argument
Post reply on HN